John Mica

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. May I inquire as to the time remaining on each side?

Mr. MICA. I will just conclude by saying that, in fact, the way this is crafted, this does prohibit going in and getting additional information about bad guys. That is what this is all about. The way it is crafted it misses the mark about connecting the dots. It misses the mark of having one card. Unfortunately, the Federal Government has made a farce out of the TWIC card, and we're going further with this provision that has been provided in the manager's amendment. I move my amendment at the appropriate time.

Mr. MICA. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. MICA. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, first of all, my colleagues, the amendment I have offered relates to the TWIC provisions, which refer to the trusted Transportation Worker Identification Credential. This is one of those cards I'm holding in my hand. It's called a TWIC card. Now, this is not the Colbert Report. It's not the Jon Stewart report, but it's almost a comedy of errors that we're here talking about a TWIC card 7 years after 9/11--the Transportation Worker Identification Credential. Spent 7 years. We have a card. We've had four State demonstrations. We've spent millions of taxpayer dollars in developing this card, and I can't take this card and go over and put it in a reader like we can do with our voting cards, because we don't have a reader that reads this card. It gets worse. We have no agreements with the States, like Florida, to allow States to require additional checks. In fact, the language of the manager's amendment--and some of it was put in, I understand, by the Homeland Security Committee--makes the line between the States and the Federal Government even more difficult. Now, the goal, I thought, was to have one card. The way we're going, we're going to end up with two cards. In fact, we have two cards in Florida now because this card doesn't even have a reader. The second goal was to connect the dots so that information that we have we would have at the State, local and Federal levels. Remember 9/ 11 and what happened before we weren't able to connect the dots? So the proviso that is in the bill does not allow us to connect the dots. The recently adopted manager's amendment includes a provision that directs the Government Accountability Office, the GAO, to make recommendations on limiting State and local criminal background checks--I'm not kidding. That's what's in here--and, from conducting such background checks, limiting our States. These provisions restrict the ability of State and local law enforcement officials to do their jobs. I oppose these provisions for those obvious reasons. Some time ago in Florida, we had a commission that looked at the criminal activity at some of our ports, and we found very significant numbers of port workers, transportation workers, with criminal backgrounds. This goes in the opposite direction, this provision in this bill, and that is why I've offered this amendment today. So my amendment directs the GAO to determine whether State and local background checks assist State and local law enforcement officials in carrying out their safety, security and law enforcement responsibilities, including their drug enforcement responsibilities. In addition to asking the GAO for recommendations in minimizing redundant background checks, my amendment also seeks GAO recommendation, not to impede or to stop, but to facilitate the sharing of background check identification data with State and local governments. I don't think this is an unreasonable request. I'm willing to work with folks on both sides of the aisle to make certain, if we ever get a Transportation Worker Identification Credential, that it does the job that we set out for it to do. So I pledge to work with the Homeland Security Committee, and I pledge to continue to work with my colleague, Mr. Oberstar. This is not the provision that we intended. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MICA. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) is going to control the time if he may.

Mr. MICA. Thank you so much for recognizing me. My remarks tonight will be somewhat abbreviated since I'm a bit hoarse, much to the pleasure of those that don't like to hear me; but I will, with some dismay to others, proceed. First of all, I would urge my colleagues to support this legislation. We are going to have a manager's amendment in a few minutes that has some provisions that I have questions about. This bill to authorize the Coast Guard for 1 year is basically a good bill. I do have some questions with some of the provisions. First of all, I have to thank Mr. Oberstar and Mr. Cummings and certainly our ranking member, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo). They have worked tirelessly. Particularly, I have to give a lot of credit to Mr. LoBiondo. He absolutely loves the Coast Guard, I think, with all his heart and soul; and he is dedicated to the men and women who serve. So from our side of the aisle, I want to thank, again, Mr. Oberstar and Mr. Cummings and staff, everyone working together. We have not passed a Coast Guard authorization since July of 2006, and this is an example of bipartisan effort. It's also an example of having introduced legislation and fine-tuning it. There were some problems with some of the initial submissions in the initial act that was submitted, and I think we've come a long way from that point. I do want to, again, thank the men and women of the Coast Guard. They do a great job for safety and security of our Nation's coast, and they are there when we need them. We need this authorization now to provide both the policy, the programs and also the funding for that great organization. When I became the ranking member, I remember one of the first calls I got was from the Coast Guard commandant. It wasn't a time that I particularly look on as a bright spot in the history of the Coast Guard. They had had a number of problems with developing a security class cutter. We had some 110-foot cutters that were being retrofitted to a greater length and for hopefully a longer useful life, and both of those programs had run aground. I think we have worked with the Coast Guard and helped them learn from their experience. I think there was an attempt to possibly inject the government becoming a systems integrator, and heaven forbid that a smaller agency like the Coast Guard would be cast with that responsibility when it's even difficult for the Navy to take on that. But again, working with Members, I think they have crafted some good provisions in this legislation that will address some of the shortcomings that we see. Mr. Oberstar has paid particular attention to the safety regime and also the structure of the senior Coast Guard leadership. This action today approves longstanding requests from the Coast Guard to modernize their command structure. I think the bill also has some other excellent provisions in it. One of those that I take particular interest in is that the bill establishes a civil penalty for possession of illegal drugs on U.S. waters. It also includes enhanced tools for the Federal Government to apprehend and prosecute individuals who seek to smuggle undocumented persons into the United States. Both of these provisions will help the Coast Guard better carry out its law enforcement responsibilities. So there are a number of good provisions in here. I do have questions about the manager's amendment. Mr. LoBiondo and I are concerned about possible watering down of some of the provisions relating to piracy. Unfortunately, we've seen cases of mayhem and piracy on the open seas, and we want to give all the tools that we possibly can for enforcement on the high seas. We don't want to have a whole host of impediments to people protecting themselves or taking action against pirates. I believe that, again, an amendment that's offered by Mr. LoBiondo, which I will strongly support, will restore some of the intention of having a strong anti-pirate provision and capability for our maritime personnel. I also have some concerns in the legislation in several other areas; I won't get into them too much at this point. One in particular deals with the TWIC card, the Transportation Worker Identification Credential. The State of Florida has also had a demonstration of this technology and this card, along with three other States. They have some reservations about the provisions that are included in this legislation. I do have an amendment that deals with that, and that is another concern. Finally, we also have a small provision in here I am pleased that I was able to help include, and that's establishing a congressional nomination system for admission to the Coast Guard Academy. Three of our other services have this; we don't have it for the Coast Guard. I think it will enhance the prestige of the Coast Guard Academy, and it will also help us assemble an even more capable, I think, and diverse student body. I commend Chairman Cummings, Mr. Oberstar and Mr. LoBiondo, our Republican leader on this subcommittee, for their efforts.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, I am pleased to come to the House today and join in a bipartisan effort to pass the regional commuter airline safety legislation. I really don't need a prepared speech to talk about this, having been involved with Mr. Costello, Mr. Oberstar, our ranking member of the Aviation Subcommittee, Mr. Petri, on almost a daily basis for a number of weeks. In fact, having chaired the Aviation Subcommittee and now a leader of the full committee, I can't think of any issue we have probably spent more quality time on and a more bipartisan effort. If all the legislation was fashioned in the manner in which this was, I think Congress would be in great shape and held in great esteem by the public. As you have heard today, this legislation comes as a result of a tragedy. We have had the good fortune of having our large passenger aircraft not have really a significant incidence of fatalities since, I believe, November of 2001, but we have had at least, since 2003, six regional commuter aircraft crashes, and we have had over 155 deaths in an even shorter period of time. That prompted me, and I brought the record, and I will probably put it in the Record, my calls for looking at commuter airline safety. Unfortunately, the crash in Buffalo, the sixth crash that we had, and the families that have been mentioned here today who had victims in Flight 3407, also took up the banner, turned a horrible personal tragedy and loss into something positive and have worked in a positive fashion to craft good legislation. Let me just cite for the record that we all came together and we entered in drafting legislation. We introduced it in a bipartisan fashion, as we say around here, the big four, Mr. Oberstar and myself, Mr. Petri, Mr. Costello. Then we thought we had done what we needed to do. But it wasn't long before that legislation saw the light of day, and we got to folks talking about the provisions. One of the more controversial provisions was going from a smaller number of flight hours to 1,500 flight hours. We felt, we believed then and we firmly believe today, that commuter and regional aircraft passengers shouldn't be second-class passengers. The pilot that's in the cockpit of those smaller aircraft should have the same skills and training, background and educational experience as those pilots in larger commercial aircraft. After we introduced that, we found, in fact, that we needed to fine- tune the legislation and make certain that the type of hours aren't just simple flight hours. If someone is towing a banner, for example, does that qualify you to fly commercial passenger aircraft as someone flying in, say, the tropics and never experienced a de-icing? If someone is flying a mail route and never had passengers in an aircraft, a crop duster, might rack up 1,500 hours; that wasn't what we wanted. We sat down. We sat down with experts, pilots. We sat down with officials from the Federal Aviation Administration. We sat down with all the parties who could provide us guidance. I think what we came up with is the best possible guidelines for FAA to ensure that we have quality, qualified pilots in the cockpit of regional carriers. I just want to thank again everyone who has participated. Now, let me say that the challenge is just beginning. We have not had an FAA reauthorization, I think, since I have chaired the subcommittee. We just got an FAA administrator some months ago. We were one of the longest times without an administrator. Our overall bill, FAA bill that sets policy projects and all of the important aspects of aviation safety, is still not in place. Mr. Oberstar and I, Mr. Petri, Mr. Costello, we have done our due diligence in the House. We all need now to work on the other body. It is my hope that we can incorporate this legislation into the master FAA reauthorization and get that signed by the President into law so that, again, we can ensure for regional passengers of commercial aircraft, for the flying public, and for all aircraft in our skies and for the future the best possible safety measures in law.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to vote on rollcalls 738 and 739. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``nay'' on each of these measures.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schock), one of the rising stars on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Mr. MICA. Might I inquire as to the amount of time on each side?

Mr. MICA. I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, I want to thank the Chair of the full T&I Committee and my Democrat counterpart on the committee, the leader, Mr. Oberstar, for his tireless efforts. He has been fighting unprecedented obstacles in trying to pass a 6-year extension of our most important transportation infrastructure legislation. As you know, in just a few days our current legislation expires. In Congress we passed a 6-year authorization, and that's important so that States can plan and other entities can do long-term projects. As we have seen, the problem with the stimulus bill is we had some very narrow constraints on the time in which money could be spent. And because significant infrastructure projects take a long time to go through planning, process, approval, and the various red tape, we have seen that it's very difficult, in fact, almost impossible, even with the best efforts of Secretary LaHood and district secretaries throughout the Nation, transportation leaders throughout the Nation, to move that money out into projects and get people working. That is why a 6-year bill is very important. I am kind of sad in a way that we have to come here for a 3-month extension. Now, I am not opposed to a 3-month extension; but on behalf of my leadership, what my leadership has requested is that this extension be brought to the floor not on a suspension, which is sort of a unanimous consent to proceed, but to have the legislation go through the Rules Committee and have the opportunity for our side of the aisle to express itself. And the only opportunity you get to do that is in a motion to recommit and through the regular order and process. That only requires a majority vote, and I am confident at that time many Members would vote on both sides of the aisle to proceed. Everyone would like a long-term transportation bill. No one is happy that we are here at this 11th hour. The current legislation expires in just a few days, without a long-term bill to get people working, to get long-term approval. So what we have here are several problems. First, we have a short- term proposal which many people have been opposed to. I will take you back to the last time we did a 6-year bill. It took a year and a half, nearly 2 years to pass the next bill, so people were left in limbo for a long time. States can't plan. Projects can't move forward. Major infrastructure cannot be built nor approved when you don't know what the level of Federal participation will be. There are some issues with this proposal to proceed for 3 months. Members on both sides of the aisle should be aware of them. First of all, we have an issue that some projects, and it has been confirmed with the other side of the aisle today, some projects that are named in the past 6-year bill will not go over into this extension. So in one category of nontransit and transit, you have about a quarter of a billion, about a half a billion dollars in total will be transferred from the past legislation and directed toward specific projects to the discretion of the Secretary. So that does raise some ire, some questions, not just on the Republican side but on the other side, what is going to happen with this half a billion dollars. The other issue that we don't address in this, and this is kind of sad because we do need to do this long term, is rescissions. Rescissions, unfortunately we made a decision when we passed the last bill when we got to this stage that we had to have money to support these projects. We don't have money to support these projects at the level we had previously agreed upon, so what takes place is an automatic rescission. Now, I wish this extension dealt with the rescission issue. What is going to happen, even if we pass this, most of the Members of Congress, and listen carefully, you are going to get a call from your Secretary of Transportation. The Secretary of Transportation is going to tell you that the States will begin announcing rescissions. That means they are going to be cutting back projects because Congress hasn't done its work. A 3-month extension isn't going to do that. We really need a 6-month extension to stop the rescissions. I'm telling you, you are going to get those calls and that is a concern that is not addressed in this legislation. So we do have some problems with this. All in all, I want to move the process forward. If the Republican side of the aisle, my side of the aisle decides to take down or not approve an extension today, it is not the final word. What they would like is the opportunity, and I present this on behalf of our leadership on this side of the aisle, is a fair chance to bring up an issue. It may only be one vote, one opportunity to submit to the House for hopeful improvement in this move to extend the expiring transportation authorization. It may be only one opportunity. They would like to do that through the regular order of coming out with a rule. So that is the situation we find ourselves in. It is not a happy situation for me. It is not a happy situation for my colleague, Mr. Oberstar, but that is the reality of the legislative situation that presents itself this afternoon. I have additional comments, but I will reserve the balance of my time at this time.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to one of the leaders on our side of the aisle, part of our leadership team, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), the ranking member of the Highway Subcommittee of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3\1/2\ minutes. First of all, unfortunately we do have ourselves in an awkward situation here. Let me separate some fact from fiction. Some statements have been made both by the Democratic side of the aisle and the Republican side of the aisle that I would like to address. First, no one wants to kill a highway bill, and no one is intent on killing the measure that's before us today to extend for 3 months. What I came here to ask on behalf of my leadership was that we, in fact, get the opportunity for regular order, that there be an opportunity for a bill to come through rules. Sometimes you get one motion to recommit or one motion to be heard on changing the substance of legislation or influencing or stating your opinion on that legislation. That's all my leadership asked for was a 1-day delay. We're not going to delay the extension of the bill because the current bill extends through the 30th. Now let me tell you, I've tried to be as bipartisan as I can in this process and as the Republican leader of the largest committee in Congress, working with Mr. Oberstar, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Duncan, all the principals in this, to move forward because it is important for jobs. It is important for our economy. It is important for the infrastructure that we know is crumbling. It's important for the future of this country to have sound infrastructure. This extension, whether it's passed today or tomorrow, doesn't make a difference. What my leadership has asked is that they be given that one opportunity to make a presentation. There's no attempt to take down the bill. There is a request to have it come through regular order. We all want jobs. Again, it's just that request. Now I have deferred to the other side of the aisle. The other side of the aisle in the House has been abandoned so many times, I feel like an orphan sometimes trying to help the chairman of the full committee. I stood with him when the message was delivered to us that they were going to abandon our work for a 6-year bill, a 72-month bill. I stood with him when the Secretary of Transportation came and gave us the bad news and said that that's not the way to go. I stood with them when the other body, the United States Senate, said, No, we're going to delay this process and only go 18 months. Now I think I owe it to my leadership, on behalf of the minority--and we are the minority--to try to get them the opportunity to have their word on this legislation since it does have significant impact on the future of transportation, our infrastructure, the country and our economy. I think that's the least we could do from our side of the aisle as a responsible minority. So it's not an attempt to take it down. It's an attempt to state a position. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Thank you for recognizing me, and I just want to take a minute to add my support for the reauthorization that is before us today. I want to associate myself with the comments of Chairman Oberstar, the full committee chairman. I am pleased as the ranking Republican on the committee to join him, and I also support Mr. Costello in his statements for the reauthorization. This delay in reauthorizing policy and projects and all of the Federal direction to the Federal Aviation Administration, this delay is unprecedented. Not only has the House acted appropriately, we passed in the last Congress and we passed again in this Congress authorization. The other body has yet to act on this important matter and left us in limbo. I am hoping that this is, in fact, the last extension. This is, in fact, the seventh extension. This is, in fact, I believe, the longest period we have gone in history without in place policy and law authorizing the Federal Aviation Administration. One of the major issues is behind us, and that is the issue of the air traffic controllers' contract. That has been resolved. The administration has cut a deal with the union. I think it has got about a three-quarters of a billion dollar price tag, but that is off the table. It was an item that was contentious. This legislation should be able to be conferenced with the other body in less than an hour. There are just one or two remaining items. I cannot believe that we are here again with a seventh request for extension. We have no choice but to request this extension now. Hopefully, Congress can reach a bipartisan and bicameral accord and pass a long-term FAA reauthorization. It is critical for the next generation. It is critical for having a policy in place that runs one of the key safety regulatory agencies in our government vital to the aviation industry and the economy of our Nation. So I am pleased to join Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Costello, our ranking member, Mr. Petri, and I am hoping that we can move forward both with this reauthorization and then with a permanent bill.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, again, the situation we find ourselves in, in just a few minutes here, will be to vote whether or not to proceed with a 3-month extension on the highway bill. Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, my side of the aisle and my leadership is asking not to kill a 3-month extension. We are very much in favor of a highway bill. What they are asking for is an opportunity to be heard, for this bill to go through regular order through the Rules Committee and have one opportunity, at least one opportunity, for the minority to be heard on this important piece of legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, might I inquire, before I begin, as to the amount of time that I have remaining and the amount of time the gentleman from Minnesota has remaining.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the life and accomplishments of William R. DeCota, the Director of Aviation for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Bill was one of our Nation's great aviation leaders. I knew Bill DeCota for the last decade. When I became the Chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee I held a hearing at the World Trade Center on July 16, 2001, at the request of Bill DeCota and Neil Levin, Director of the New York Port Authority. During that visit to New York City, Bill and Neil invited me to tour the three major New York City airports. I knew Neil Levin when he was Legislative Director for Senator Al D'Amato and I served as Chief of Staff for Senator Paula Hawkins. After a hearing in the Port Authority chambers, they hosted my wife, Pat, and me at a luncheon in a Port Authority conference room adjacent to the Windows on the World Restaurant at the top of the World Trade Center. Levin and Port Authority employee, who assisted with the hearing in July, were in that very same conference room in the World Trade Center on September 11, and lost their lives. As fate would have it, Bill DeCota was at a conference in Montreal, Canada, on September 11th and survived the terrible events of that day. In the ensuing years, Bill and I often talked about the randomness of life. It is therefore striking that Bill died suddenly last Friday, September 11, 2009, eight years later. It must be noted that in the months and years after 9/11, Bill's stewardship of the world's busiest airport system was truly the greatest of any airport director. Bill joined the Port Authority as a financial analyst in 1982 and quickly rose through the ranks, serving as Manager of the Aviation Department's Business and Financial Services Division, Assistant Director of Aviation for Business and Properties, and Deputy Director of Aviation. He was named Director of Aviation in December 1999. As Director, Bill was responsible for John F. Kennedy International, Newark Liberty International, and LaGuardia Airports, and later Stewart Airport--which together comprise the world's largest aviation system. He was also responsible for Teterboro Airport. In that capacity, Bill oversaw the largest airport improvement program in U.S. history. Bill was recognized as an expert in aviation and was an active advocate for airport issues on Capitol Hill and in the business community. His expertise in managing airport congestion through prudent airport expansion, cutting-edge technologies and demand management was widely recognized in the aviation industry. Bill was also strongly committed to the community and was actively involved in numerous service organizations. He was a member of the Advisory Board of CUNY's Aviation Institute at York College, President of the Queens Council of the Boy Scouts of America, and a member of the Board of the Regional Business Partnership, the Airport Development Council and the Business Advisory Council of SUNY Farmingdale, among others. Bill received a bachelor's degree from the University of Mississippi, and an M.B.A. from the University of Georgia. He resided in Old Bridge, New Jersey. True to how he lived his life, funeral arrangements for Bill will be private. His family requests that contributions in his memory be made to Elijah's Promise, New Brunswick, New Jersey, which is a nonprofit organization that runs a soup kitchen and culinary school to train local people for food-service careers. My thoughts and prayers are with Bill's family. Bill DeCota and his expertise and contributions to aviation will be greatly missed.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Madam Speaker, on August 25th, Florida lost one of its great leaders in education with the passing of recently retired Stetson University President H. Douglas Lee. Not only was Dr. Lee recognized for his outstanding leadership and dedication to Stetson, he was also well known for his contributions to community, state and nation. It was an honor and privilege to know Doug and his wife of 44 years, Margaret, and to call them wonderful friends. In his 22 years as President, Doug worked on countless projects to enhance the educational opportunities at Stetson. Most recently, I had the privilege to work with Doug in the renovation of Sage Hall. In 2007, Doug came to me and shared his vision for renovating Stetson's Sage Hall to strengthen the science curriculum at the University. Through private fundraising, federal support and an enormous amount of dedication, Doug saw this project through to completion. The Sage Hall project, a 20,000 square foot addition with new science equipment, was completed and rededicated earlier this year, and will remain a testament to Doug's commitment to quality education. To Doug's wife Margaret; his son Gregory Lee and wife Lara; daughter Elizabeth Lee Williamson and husband Heath; grandsons Parker Lee, Grayson Lee and Ayers Williamson; granddaughters Maggie Williamson and Piper Williamson; father, Dr. Howard Lee; brother David Lee and wife Ethel and their children and grandchildren; sister-in-law Sarah Easley Drummond and her children and grandchildren; and brother-in-law, Charles Easley III and wife Claudia and their children; we extend our deepest condolences. Doug truly made an indelible mark on education in Florida and the United States. In our community, he always stressed integrity, compassion and public service, and through that principled dedication he leaves a proud and distinguished legacy. Madam Speaker, I ask all Members of the U.S. House of Representatives join me in recognizing Dr. H. Douglas Lee's contributions to higher education and a life commitment to making Stetson University the great institution it is today.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to Staff Sergeant Jason Dahlke, 29, who died August 29, 2009, while serving our Nation in Afghanistan on his sixth deployment in support of the War on Terror. Staff Sergeant Dahlke was a distinguished soldier serving with Company A, 1st Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment. SSG Jason Dahlke was born on November 8, 1979, in Tampa and was raised in Jacksonville with his brother and three sisters. Prior to joining the Army, he attended the University of Central Florida where he graduated with a degree in Criminal Justice and married his grade school sweetheart Niki Marie Norvell Dahlke. Mrs. Dahlke recalls her husband as her ``best friend'' and ``hero.'' We should all remember SSG Dahlke's courage and his ultimate sacrifice for our nation. The freedom and liberty we enjoy and the peace in the world for others for which he fought are part of the great legacy that SSG Dahlke leaves behind. He was laid to rest at the new Jacksonville National Veterans Cemetery on September 5, 2009. SSG Jason Dahlke is the first American killed in combat to be interred at Florida's newest veterans cemetery. SSG Dahlke will be remembered as a dedicated servant of the country he loved. During his time in the Army, SSG Dahlke received a Purple Heart and two Army Commendation Medals that he never mentioned to his parents. They only learned of their son's achievements by way of the internet. In one of his last conversations with his parents, SSG Dahlke told his family that he loved his job and that he would continue to do it as long as he could serve. Col. Michael E. Kurilla, 75th Ranger Regiment commander stated that SSG Dahlke ``embodied the Ranger Creed and all that is good, noble and honored in our Rangers.'' With the passing of SSG Dahike, America has lost an outstanding citizen and a shining example of service to our Nation. He will be remembered as a patriotic American, a pillar of our community and a compassionate husband and a loving son. To his wife Niki, his mother Deborah, his father Roger and his loving family and friends, we offer our deepest sympathy. Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to recognize SSG Jason Dahlke's contributions and to ask that all Members of the U.S. House of Representatives join me in recognizing his heroic service in our Nation's Armed Forces.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to join my Democrat counterpart who leads the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Oberstar, in requesting the $7 billion transfer. If we do not transfer these funds to keep the Highway Trust Fund secure through September 30, the consequences for the Nation at this time of economic difficulty would be an absolute disaster. In fact, we would close down probably every major highway transportation project in the Nation. That's how serious this is. Unfortunately, as the Republican leader of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Camp, said, we've been here and, unfortunately, had to do this before. This is the second bailout of the fund. Mr. Oberstar has been working nonstop for months even before this session of Congress to bring forth a responsible bill. We've tried to act in a bipartisan administration. The day that we were about to announce our policy and plans for reauthorization, the administration came in and undermined the whole effort with an 18-month extension. We need the transportation bill now. Unfortunately, we need this gap of money through September 30 or we will really see economic difficulty across this land. So this is a Band-Aid approach. I'm sorry that we have to do it. I know there are some Members that are concerned about this. We do need a long-term solution. We will work together to get that done. The minute this passes, we'll continue our efforts. But if we do not act, it will have devastating consequences in every one of the States across this Nation as far as closing down transportation projects and closing down jobs at the most difficult time in the country's recent economic history. So I want a long-term solution. I join Mr. Oberstar in requesting that we pass this measure. And unfortunately, we are put in this position of being between a rock and a hard place. I would be glad to yield to the chairman.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks. Also, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, this chart that I have here, I have been banned, as a Member of Congress, from mailing this to my constituents or just disseminating it. Is it within the rules of the House, an order of the House for me to be allowed to present this chart here at this time on the floor of the House of Representatives?