Jim Moran

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Lebanese Taverna on their 35th Anniversary. Tanios and Marie Abi-Najm immigrated to the United States in 1976, along with their five young children: Dory, Dany, David, Gladys and Grace. The family boarded a cargo ship, in the dead of the night, to escape the Civil War in Lebanon, bringing only what they could carry. Their final destination was Arlington, Virginia where other family members had already been living. After working in local restaurants for three years, the family saved enough to purchase a small restaurant in the Westover neighborhood of Arlington, near their home. Being practical, they kept the original sign, ``Athenian Taverna,'' changing just one word, thus ``Lebanese Taverna'' was born. Each family member had a role at the original location, whether it was greeting guests, serving food, cooking in the kitchen or finishing homework at the tables. Lebanese Taverna today, 35 years later, is a multi-concept collaboration with six restaurants, four quick service cafes, a market, and full service catering division. Tanios and Marie are easing into retirement (although still involved in quality control) while the five siblings, each with their own specialty, operate the business. Today the Abi-Najm children still greet old friends and welcome new ones into the restaurants where they grew up and shared their lives, in keeping with their motto, ``good food enjoyed in good company.'' Lebanese Taverna has come to symbolize the realization of dreams and the rewards of dedication. Mr. Speaker, once again, let me congratulate Mr. and Mrs. Abi-Najm on their 35 years of success. This family embodies the very best ideals of the American dream; hard work and a strong commitment to family and community. Congratulations on 35 years of success!

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding organization in my district. The Alexandria Redevelopment & Housing Authority (ARHA) was created by the City of Alexandria under the authorization of Housing Authority Law, Chapter 1, Title 36 Code of Virginia, in 1939, for the express purpose of operating the Affordable Housing Program for low and moderate-income individuals in Alexandria. ARHA's goal is to provide citizens the ability to own a home or secure an affordable rental unit and improve the quality of life for all Alexandrians. ARHA commenced operations in Alexandria, Virginia in 1941. They built their organization on a foundation that advocated the importance of providing safe, decent, sanitary, and affordable housing. They have grown into a stellar operation and are a leader in the development and management of mixed income housing in Alexandria. Home equity, housing security, and self-sufficiency are all important for Alexandrians to ensure a high quality of life. ARHA empowers its clients in these areas by providing an array of supportive services that give residents the opportunities needed to grow independently. A healthy housing industry is important to the economic development of the City of Alexandria. It provides families with affordable housing opportunities and the chance to build equity while strengthening the tax base, creating jobs, and opening doors for further growth and development. Their continued partnerships between financial institutions and housing developers will continue to provide needed affordable housing opportunities for residents in Alexandria. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize the Alexandria Redevelopment & Housing Authority for their outstanding work and contribution to our community.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Karen L. Pallansch, Chief Executive Officer of Alexandria Renew Enterprises, on her election as President of the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA). Alexandria Renew is an independent government agency providing wastewater treatment services to the City of Alexandria and portions of Fairfax County, Virginia. Beyond her wealth of environmental and engineering experience, I commend Ms. Pallansch for embracing a collaborative approach to watershed-based solutions that have garnered broad support among the public, business, elected officials, regulators and policymakers. Ms. Pallansch is also a staunch and effective advocate for investing in our nation's aging and often deteriorating water infrastructure-- investments that convey both environmental and economic benefits and help communities across our great nation to grow and thrive. Ms. Pallansch believes--as I do--that great communities need and deserve great water infrastructure and great quality water. As the Chief Executive Officer of the former Alexandria Sanitation Authority (ASA)--the precursor to Alexandria Renew--Karen presided over the completion of the Authority's awarding-winning Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility that led the way in meeting the gold standard for removing nitrogen--one of the culprits behind the declining health of the Chesapeake Bay. Always seeking to be a good neighbor, ASA put much of the facility underground so as not to detract from the City's beauty and bring an Old Town look to the business of water protection. When more stringent federal rules came along, Ms. Pallansch, working closely with her dedicated Board and staff, embarked on a massive State-of-the-Art Nitrogen Upgrade Program (SANUP) from which emerged the reimagining of what a wastewater treatment facility could be. More than having cutting-edge technology, the facility she manages offers community-friendly features, including a regulation soccer field open to the public on top of an 18 million gallon treatment system. Alexandria Renew is moving down a bold new path to greater sustainability, helping to build greener, more sustainable communities, and creating in her agency ``a utility of the future.'' To reflect this broader enterprise, on Earth Day 2012, Ms. Pallansch announced that the Alexandria Sanitation Authority would be rebranded as Alexandria Renew Enterprises--the community's resource recovery center. The promise and synergy of this change are already being seen in a successful public-developer partnership that will create a vibrant new neighborhood from a dusty industrial area that was once an unregulated landfill for the City. Ms. Pallansch has a long and distinguished career in the water reclamation field. She began as a staff engineer, rising to several senior positions before accepting position of CEO where she is now responsible for a $40 million operating budget and a $220 million capital improvement plan. Mr. Speaker, once again, let me congratulate Karen Pallansch on her election as President of NACWA. As with Alexandria Renew Enterprises, I am sure she will lead the organization down a road marked by innovation, collaboration, progress and success. I wish her and NACWA the very best in their future endeavors.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN. Madam Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. MORAN. Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes to explain that my amendment would allow the U.S. military to transfer to their home countries the 77 detainees who have been cleared for release by the intelligence community and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and to bring those not cleared for release to the United States to be charged, tried, and sentenced. The Sergeant Bergdahl exchange has brought this issue again to center stage, but the fact is that, if we had dealt with these individuals in a responsible and legal way, we would not be in this situation discussing the merits of the decision to release five of them. For 12 years now, Guantanamo has operated outside of a legal checks of the American judicial system, serving a physical reminder of the gap between the principles that define us as Americans and our willingness to abandon those principles in the name of national security. With the final withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan this year, the continued indefinite detention at Guantanamo enters a new stage. We will no longer be at war, and the current Authorization for the Use of Military Force will expire. So we have to ask ourselves: Do we have the legal authority to hold these enemy combatants indefinitely? Now is the time to either transfer or bring these men to trial--now--while we can still do so on our own terms, while we can give the Defense Department the legal authority it needs to make the right decisions about these prisoners. It is costing us $2.7 million per detainee, per year, versus $34,000 at a maximum security prison in the United States. More than 300 individuals convicted of crimes related to international terrorism are currently incarcerated in 98 Federal prisons in the United States, with no escapes or attacks in attempts to free them. The indictment and capture of Ahmed Abu Khattala for his role in the Benghazi attack is a great example of our ability to deal with high- profile terrorists swiftly and safely. Mr. Khattala will not be brought to Guantanamo to become yet another symbol of U.S. hypocrisy. He will be brought to the United States to answer for his crimes in a Federal court and punished in accordance with the laws of this Nation. I have every confidence in our legal institutions to bring Mr. Khattala to justice. General Michael Lehnert, who oversaw the opening of Gitmo has said that its continued operation ``has helped our enemies'' and makes ``a mockery of our values.'' It is time to put an end to this by supporting this amendment, and let me just use one more quote. In the words of the family members of the 9/11 victims, the current system is ``immoral, unlawful, expensive, counterproductive, unnecessary, and has failed to deliver justice for the 9/11 attacks.'' I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this bill. There are some facts that need to be put on the table that are inconsistent with what has been suggested by the gentleman from Arkansas. 18.6 percent of the people that were released by the Bush administration were ``confirmed'' recidivism cases, but it needs to be made clear that the Obama administration has released 95 people, and five of them have gone back to the battlefield. Now, we don't want anyone to go back to the battlefield. There are 149 detainees still at Guantanamo. Fifteen are clearly the worst of the worst. Nobody is talking about transferring them, ever; but among them are a number of Muslim men who are innocent of any act against this country or our allies who were in the wrong place at the wrong time and were kidnapped by bounty hunters. Only 5 percent of the prisoners held at Guantanamo were actually apprehended by U.S. forces, and as many as 86 percent were delivered to coalition forces in exchange for a bounty of millions of dollars per head. There are 78 people who have been cleared for release by the Department of Defense, and they are still under detention. That is a travesty. That is not right. That is inconsistent with everything we believe and stand for in terms of American jurisprudence. I think the gentleman has made it sufficiently clear by now that many of us know that the political and legal expediency of this detention center at Guantanamo has not been worth the cost to America's reputation around the world, nor to the erosion of our legal and ethical standards here at home. For far too long, over the course of this war, we have let our fear and anger triumph over our commitment to the rule of law, and every day that we continue to hold these men without charge, we diminish ourselves and cede our moral authority in the world. So, Mr. Chairman, this amendment is wrong. We need to exercise our judgment. Not all are the same. Not all should be there. Some should be tried in our courts, and this country has the ability to try and prosecute them.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Thank you, Mr. Blumenauer.

Mr. MORAN. Absolutely. And the executives, the folks who have been involved with the Navy who showed me this map of our naval shipyards, within my son's lifetime are going to be under water. They did say, well, if it is any consolation, Florida is in worse shape. Of course, it is no consolation that Florida is in worse shape than Virginia, but the reality is it is obviously not confined to Virginia; it is all along the low-lying coast. Unfortunately, by the time that some people wake up and accept it, it may very well be too late.

Mr. MORAN. Absolutely. We just were shown a map by naval executives, and I hesitate to say this because it is so scary, but the reality is that the entire Naval Shipyard and the Norfolk shipbuilding base which builds our nuclear carriers within a relatively short period of time, a few decades, is liable to be underwater. So we can't afford to continue to deny climate change, literally. So I appreciate your leadership, again, on this, Mr. Blumenauer, and we have got to continue the fight.

Mr. MORAN. You are making fun of our New England accent, Mr. Blumenauer.

Mr. MORAN. These are the words of the majority of Republicans under the age of 34 that they are either ``ignorant, out of touch, or crazy.'' Ignorant, out of touch, or crazy. Now, we wouldn't use those words, but the majority of Republicans under the age of 34 do use those words towards those who deny that we should do something about climate change. We, along with the rest of the world, have a duty to protect our children and future generation from the effects of climate change. So I stand here with my colleagues to ensure that the Obama administration's effort to limit carbon pollution is not diminished or blocked by the Congress. For the sake of our national security, and the sake of a better future, the Obama administration's proposal to limit carbon emissions must be allowed to go forward. I thank you very much, my friend, and I thank you for your leadership. Let's hope things get better.

Mr. MORAN. I thank the gentleman from Oregon for giving me the opportunity to join my distinguished colleagues, but particularly you, my very good friend, Mr. Blumenauer. I just cannot thank you enough on behalf of this country for your leadership on this issue. This is an important opportunity to discuss the President's proposed standard to limit carbon pollution because, just last week, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy announced proposed regulations that would reduce carbon pollution by 30 percent, below 2005 levels, basically below what they were a decade ago. So that is going to help many States who have already made substantial progress, such as Oregon, toward that objective. That is a baseline that most scientists believe is absolutely necessary to prevent irreversible climate change. The new standard relies heavily on the existing State and Federal Clean Air Act partnership that already exists which enables States to develop their own paths to reduce carbon emissions. States are going to have the flexibility to cut emissions based on what makes the most sense for their unique situation, including options like reducing demand to encourage production of cleaner sources of electricity, cap-and-trade programs, and a menu of other energy efficiency ideas. States can work collectively with other States to develop multi-State carbon reduction plans. But without this major course correction, our present trajectory on climate change threatens the future of this planet. As each day passes without action, the more we are destined to harm our environment, our country, and our loved ones. So while this plan may not be perfect, the current public comment period does provide an opportunity to improve on it. And given the inability of Congress to enact meaningful legislation on this or almost any of the other pressing issues our country confronts, I fully support the President's decision directing the Environmental Protection Agency to issue a standard for carbon emissions because it has become clear that this Congress will not do so. It is no secret that the majority who control this Chamber are in climate change denial. Just 2 weeks ago, the House passed an amendment offered by Mr. McKinley of West Virginia to the National Defense Authorization bill that prevents the Pentagon from using funds to implement climate change assessments. This is a head-in-the-sand amendment, essentially a way to ensure that the realities of climate change are ignored by our national security policymakers. It is an absurd notion that our military leaders should not react to the unequivocal fact that the planet is warming and that human activities are responsible. The McKinley amendment, and those who voted for it, remind me of the 16th century Catholic Church, Mr. Blumenauer, that condemned the work of a scientist by the name of Galileo who dared to claim that the Earth was not the center of the universe but that it, along with the planets, revolved around the Sun. Now, those who voted for the amendment--and I hate to say the number, it was embarrassingly large--but those who voted for the amendment were telling our military to irresponsibly disregard the findings of the scientific community that our planet is warming. But our military leaders, fortunately, do get it. They do understand that the climate is changing, and they are doing their best with limited resources to be prepared to respond to that changing environment. Climate change is a national security concern for a number of reasons. First and foremost, it is a catalyst for instability and conflict around the world. The U.S. Department of Defense's own Quadrennial Defense Review--this is the document that defines the Department's strategic objectives and potential military threats-- declared the threat of climate change is a serious national security vulnerability that could enable terrorist activity. The Quadrennial Defense Review specifically states: The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. The results will be a higher demand for American troops abroad, even as we struggle to deal with the devastating impacts caused by flooding and extreme weather events here at home. Climate change is also a new form of stress on our military readiness. The Navy, for example, estimates that 128 of its installations just at the Norfolk, Virginia, Naval Shipyard alone would be affected by a 1-meter rise in sea level which we have to anticipate. It recently had to spend $240 million to double-deck four of its piers down at the Norfolk Naval Base so that they could harden utility lines and make the structures more resilient to sea level rise and more extreme and more frequent weather events. Now, as an appropriator, I and my colleagues on the committee are dealing with the reality of climate change in Federal agency budgets. The effects of climate change are ratcheting up Federal expenditures. The 10-year average for wildland fire costs, the basis on which we attempt to budget for fighting wildland fires, is going up every year. We spent more than $800 million on wildfires just last year. So, our military gets it, the vast majority of the American public gets it, and the executive branch gets it. It seems that almost everyone--almost everyone--gets the fact that climate change is happening; that is, everyone but a majority here in the House and a filibuster-sufficient minority in the Senate. Perhaps they are in denial because their political base either chooses to be ignorant or is profiting from inaction. Perhaps it is a generational issue. I have seen a poll that a majority of all self-defined Republicans under the age of 34 think politicians who deny that climate change are either--and I am just quoting now, of course, these are not my words.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 275, I was detained at a funeral. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' Personal Explanation

Mr. MORAN

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

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, the person that my good friend refers to is not a Guantanamo detainee. The reality is that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not representative of the vast majority of Gitmo detainees who were brought 13, 14 years ago. There are a handful several years later that were brought to Guantanamo. They are really bad guys. They are kept separately. But I am talking about the people, 86 percent of whom were turned in for bounties, the majority of whom were not involved in combat activity against the United States or its allies. We ought to look at this Guantanamo population and do what this country, our Founding Fathers, intended that we do. Give them a right to trial, prosecute them, and punish them. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), from the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes. Sections 528 and 529 of this bill would restrict the Department of Justice from transferring detainees to the United States. The problem with this is that Guantanamo is now a rallying cry for extremists around the world. Until we transfer and try these detainees, there is no denying that Guantanamo is hurting our national security, and so my amendment would strike sections 528 and 529. Mr. Chair, we are currently spending $2,670,000 per detainee per year at Guantanamo compared to $34,000 per year at a high-security Federal prison here in the United States. In fiscal year 2014, the Department of Defense estimates that it is going to spend $435 million in operations and personnel costs to operate this facility. That money could so much better be spent on military readiness, medical research, improving the quality of life for our men and women in uniform. The fact is, Mr. Chair, nearly 500 defendants charged with crimes related to international terrorism have been successfully convicted in the United States since 9/11, quoting a former Gitmo detainee: the Times Square bomber; the shoe bomber; and a 9/11 coconspirator, Zacarias Moussaoui. All of them are incarcerated in 98 Federal prisons here in the United States with no security incidents. Now, by comparison, military commissions, which is the alternative, have managed to prosecute eight cases in that time, and many of them have, in fact, been overturned on appeal. There are six DOD facilities where Gitmo detainees could be held in the United States that are currently only at 48 percent capacity. The political and legal expediency of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay is not worth the cost to America's reputation around the world nor to the erosion of our legal and ethical standards here at home. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. The amendment would strike both section 528 and 529 so I ask that they would be considered en bloc.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of our Nation's wounded warriors, Retired Lieutenant Colonel Jerome E. Kelly, of Alexandria, Virginia. A 1965 graduate of West Point Military Academy, Lieutenant Colonel Kelly was awarded the Bronze Star for Valor and a Purple Heart for his service in Vietnam, where he suffered a severe head wound in combat. After a long recovery during which he was nursed back to health by his loving wife Lee, he attended Washington & Lee School of Law and was admitted to the District of Columbia Bar. After graduation Lieutenant Colonel Kelly completed his active duty career in the United States Army as a member of the Judge Advocate General Corp, with tours of duty in Virginia and with U.S. forces in Seoul, South Korea. After retiring from active duty in 1986, Lieutenant Colonel Kelly continued his service to the Nation as a civilian employee to the Army at Ft. Belvoir, Virginia. Mr. Speaker, Colonel Kelly has recently taken ill and I would like to wish him a speedy recovery. I would also like to extend my appreciation to his wife Lee for her sacrifices throughout the years. I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing Lieutenant Colonel Jerome E. Kelly for his many years of dedicated service to our Nation.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chair, Guantanamo is a rallying cry for extremists around the world. Until we transfer and try these detainees, it is hurting our national security, and Gitmo is expensive. We are spending about $2.7 million per detainee per year at Guantanamo compared to $34,000 per inmate at a high security prison in the United States. In fact, the Pentagon is going to spend $435 million this year in operations and personnel costs for this facility. The reality is we have 300 individuals convicted of crimes related to international terrorism that are currently incarcerated in 98 Federal prisons with no escapes or attacks in attempts to free them. When the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Afghanistan expires, we have no plans. What are we going to do with these prisoners of war? The Smith amendment should be passed.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, the Catholic Church is still trying to live down condemning Galileo for suggesting that the Sun, instead of the Earth, was the center of the universe. But fortunately, our military and our President is on the right side of history and science. Our military is listening to the facts and acting on the fact of climate change by ensuring that its assets are capable of withstanding more frequent and severe weather conditions, building resiliency in their command and control structures, planning military response contingencies that recognize the effects climate change is having on people, countries, and organizations around the world that may wish us harm. That is what this amendment would prevent the military from doing, because they are now reacting to the facts from these studies. Climate change is a national security concern. It is a new form of stress on military readiness. The Navy, for example, just last week identified 128 naval installations that are going to be underwater in the near future if we don't take steps now to deal with it. It is a catalyst for instability and conflict around the world. As my friend from California mentioned, the military's Quadrennial Defense Review states that ``the pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world.'' The results will be a higher demand for American troops abroad, even as we struggle to deal with the devastating impacts caused by flooding and extreme weather events at home. We have volatile regions around the world that are going to be driven to desperation and resort to terrorist activity in response to the impacts of climate change and the resulting resource competition. This is what the military is telling us. Climate change's ``effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad, such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions.'' It is a catalyst for conflict. For the sake of our military, for the sake of our national security, we have got to oppose this amendment.