Jim Moran

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my good friend, the chairman of our Financial Services Committee, for the words that he said about Ed Brooke. He would be one to know, another great leader in the area of opening up housing for all. And I thank my good friend from the District of Columbia. Ed Brooke, as Ms. Norton has made clear, grew up in D.C., graduated from Dunbar, Harvard University, and then, of course, went on to be the editor of the Law Review at Boston University and got a Bronze Medal for his service in the military. But I got to know Ed Brooke from a different perspective. In fact, Terry Lierman, who is now the chief of staff to our majority leader, and I were on the Appropriations staff when Ed Brooke was the ranking Republican. And what he did is incalculable in terms of school busing, in terms of women's reproductive rights, in the area of opening up federally-subsidized housing particularly, but housing throughout the Nation to all. Ed Brooke was a temple of justice. His intellect was unparalleled. But what he exuded was a certain class, a dignity that just transcended partisanship. He was able to work with some of the, frankly, most narrow-minded Members of the Senate to get them to take votes that were the right thing to do. And he took very little credit for it. That is why this is so appropriate, to give him credit now, because he made a profound difference in the course our country took 30 years ago. He would sit there in his calm, measured tone. He would explain why it is right to open up all of society and all of our economy to everyone who was willing to work hard and obey the law. Ed Brooke was a model that all of us should look to for leadership. He was an extraordinary person. This is an extraordinary action we are taking today, but it is for someone who fully deserves it. Again, I thank my colleagues here, and I thank the Congress for making this happen today. I will yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Frank.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, Mr. Shays and I are pleased to introduce today the Farm Animals Anti-Cruelty Act. This bill would make it a Federal offense to, without justification, kill, mutilate, disfigure, torture or intentionally inflict pain or suffering upon an animal raised for food, or to fail to provide food, water and shelter. By making these acts a Federal offense, this bill provides a powerful disincentive and punishment for unjustified or intentional cruelty. The ability to bring a Federal prosecution is a strong deterrent. Finally, this bill articulates a powerful message in expressing the national importance we place on the treatment of farm animals. The Farm Animals Anti-Cruelty Act is a commonsense approach to combating animal cruelty on farms. It complements State anti-cruelty statutes and provides a national anti-cruelty standard in those States that do not currently provide standards. This bill is just one step, but an important step, in addressing how our society treats farm animals raised for food, and it reflects our core values of compassion, decency and mercy.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation that will amend the Federal charter of the Gold Star Wives of America to allow their officers to fully participate in the legislative process. This is a change that is long overdue and releases these advocates from the unnecessary and likely unconstitutional restraints in their charter. The Gold Star Wives have a long and storied history of advocacy on behalf of the families of our Nation's fallen heroes. From World War II through today's current conflicts, these military widows and widowers have shaped the perception we have about families' struggle after the death of a loved one in military service. In doing so, they have risen from humble beginnings to become a force on Capitol Hill. Today there are more than 60 chapters nationwide that count more than 10,000 widows and widowers as their members. The Gold Star Wives are hardly an idle group, winning key legislative victories to reinstate benefits for those whose second spouses have died, and improve medical and education benefits for survivors. They have consistently fought for and won increases in dependency and indemnity compensation affecting over 300,000 survivors who depend on that benefit. It is toward the aim of helping the Gold Star Wives maintain their voice in Congress that I am introducing new legislation today that will allow all of the Gold Star Wives to freely advocate for the legislative matters that are most important to them. When the Federal charter for the Gold Star Wives was drafted in 1980, it included a broad prohibition that none of the officers of the organization could influence any legislation in any manner. Since the Gold Star Wives rely on the volunteer work of its board and officers, the prohibition particularly hurts their advocacy on behalf of military families. Other patriotic and national organizations--such as AMVETS, the VFW, the American Legion, and the Military Order of the Purple Heart--do not share this unusual restriction. I believe that this provision in the Gold Star Wives Federal charter is punitive, not practically enforceable and potentially an unconstitutional infringement upon the freedom to petition the Government. My legislation solution is simple-- it will strike this single restriction from the Gold Star Wives Federal charter. Madam Speaker, the Gold Star Wives is a top-notch organization that effectively advocates on behalf of military families. It is my intention that Congress pass this commonsense change to their charter and relieve the Gold Star Wives from this unnecessary and unconstitutional burden.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the service of dedicated individuals who volunteer their time to support CrisisLink's efforts to save lives and prevent tragedies in the 8th Congressional District and throughout the National Capital Region. Their efforts to prevent suicide are worthy of recognition. Since 1969, CrisisLink volunteers have provided invaluable, free, confidential crisis intervention services to anyone who calls their hotline. CrisisLink has played a major role in educating the community on how to recognize signs of depression and respond to the threats of suicide. Last year, CrisisLink volunteers donated a total of 17,000 hours of their time, answered 30,000 calls, and saved the National Capital Region approximately 4 million dollars in ambulance, police, emergency room, and treatment costs for attempted suicides. In addition to CrisisLink's regional hotline, volunteers also service the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, NSPL--1-800-273-TALK--and 1- 800-SUICIDE. For NSPL, the help of Crisis Link volunteers is crucial. Answering calls to prevent tragedies are performed by volunteers and staff at CrisisLink as well as other independent crisis centers across the country. It is a sad fact that 56 percent of all deaths in the U.S. are due to suicide. In comparison, homicides make up only 30 percent of all deaths. While distressing, these numbers would surely be higher if not for CrisisLink's volunteers who help individuals in a time of crisis, promote stabilization, and provide resources to empower people to help themselves. With 20 percent of suicides attributed to veterans and active duty military, crisis centers are working closely with the Department of Veteran's Affairs through the NSPL to answer calls from our service members in order to save lives and prevent tragedies. I am very grateful to CrisisLink's current and former volunteers for all they do to serve the residents of Virginia's 8th District and our region. They are available 7 days a week, 365 days a year to help people when it is most desperately needed and there is nowhere else to turn. These volunteers give their time so that others may have the gift of time--time to survive a crisis, time to heal, time to live. I laud the efforts of these dedicated volunteers and thank CrisisLink for providing such a vital service to our community.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Will the gentleman yield for just a second?

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my friend. And I do regret that he's leaving because we appreciate your point of view. And I asked you to yield, Mr. Ranking Member, because in the article that was in the New York Times they talked about a point where news articles started revealing----

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my friend and very distinguished gentleman from California. When articles came out that troops were dying because of inadequate body armor, a senior Pentagon official wrote to his colleagues, and that letter was made available to the Times, ``I think our analysts, properly armed, can push back in that arena.'' Now, I suspect you are going to be asked to comment on military things, and we are going to listen very intently. But if the Pentagon asked you to say something that you knew not to necessarily be the truth, you wouldn't do it. The problem is, we have quotes from senior military officers saying they were concerned that their employer, their military contract employers would lose access if they didn't do what the Pentagon asked. That's what we're trying to get at.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. It seems if she is that good, we ought to make an attempt at hiring her and not contracting out, if she is that good. Make her an offer she can't refuse, if she is that good.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my colleague from North Carolina, and I particularly thank him for introducing this legislation. I appreciate the views of the gentleman from Texas, but this is a commonsense amendment and there have been abuses. And the people that have abused the law, who acted illegally, whether it be at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay or some of the black sites that the CIA have operated, some of them have been contract employees. Now, if we have people who are the best interrogators, we need to hire them. This is an inherently governmental function. I think you could ask any American, even contractors, if this is work that should be contracted out and they would say no. But in fact there are job openings posted for five major defense contractors for interrogators. I represent any number of defense contractors, but I can tell you, this is not a function that they should be performing. This Congress should support Mr. Price's amendment and recognize this as inherently governmental and stop this abuse.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, a report released today by the nonprofit research organization Media Matters has found that military analysts secretly cultivated by the Pentagon's communications apparatus appeared over 4,500 times on major TV and radio networks since 2002 in segments covering the Iraq War, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and other foreign policy and national security issues. The New York Times exposed this extensive, coordinated campaign by the Pentagon and the Bush administration to influence the commentary of what viewers rightfully believed were independent television military analysts. It is an unethical, possibly illegal propaganda machine, a media Trojan horse designed to shape war coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks. It was also apparent that the motivation on the part of many was the extraordinary access they were granted to the Pentagon for their defense contractor employers. One particularly disturbing example is when troops in Iraq were dying because of inadequate body armor, a senior Pentagon official wrote to his colleagues, ``I think our analysts . . . can push back in that arena.'' The analysts, of course, were 75 retired military officers. This is conduct unbefitting of our military officers and our Nation, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, we have a situation today where Americans are paying almost $4 a gallon for gasoline. This morning, Goldman Sachs announced that oil is going to go up to $150 to $200 a barrel, which means that it is not going to stop at $4. It will be about $5 or $6. Now, think about this: This is a tremendous boom to Iran and Iraq. Iran will gain enormous wealth and political influence. Iraq will get even more revenue than the $72 billion they're anticipating this year. They got $100 billion over the last couple of years, much of it our money. And yet Americans have already contributed over half a trillion dollars to Iraq's economy. Within the next couple of weeks, we'll appropriate another $170 billion. Iraqis are getting a surplus of oil revenue from us and yet we are paying to pick up their garbage and train their security forces when they've got surpluses they don't even know what to do with. Who's the chump in this picture, Madam Speaker?

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the passing of a great lady and civil rights icon, Mildred Loving. I did not know Mrs. Loving personally, but I do know of her accomplishments for which she deserves our praise and gratitude. At a time of Jim Crow and powerful forces of racial hatred and segregation, Mildred Delores Jeter and Richard Perry Loving proved that the power of love and the simple act of living true to their beliefs was stronger and more enduring than base bigotry. When Mildred and Richard married, they were breaking the law. As an interracial couple, it was illegal for them to be married in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Instead, they obtained a marriage certificate from the District of Columbia but returned to live in Virginia, their home. A short time later, they were arrested, literally in their bedroom, and hauled off to jail. Under a plea bargain, they agreed to a 1-year suspended sentence under the condition that they not return together or at the same time to Virginia. Inspired by the civil rights movement, the couple challenged Virginia's Racial Integrity Act, taking Loving v. Virginia all the way to the Supreme Court--and winning. As the Washington Post reported today, Richard Loving counseled the couple's ACLU attorneys that the real issue was actually very simple. ``Tell the court,'' he said, ``I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can't live with her in Virginia.'' In my efforts to grant federal recognition to Virginia's Native American people, I have come across similar stories of courage, determination and love fighting to overcome Virginia's legacy of racial division and subjugation. Today we recognize Mrs. Loving, her life, her courage, and her determination for equality under the law. She was an American hero and we mourn her passing. [From the New York Times, May 6, 2008] Mildred Loving, Who Fought Ban on Mixed Marriage, Dies at 68 (By Douglas Martin) Mildred Loving, a black woman whose anger over being banished from Virginia for marrying a white man led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling overturning state miscegenation laws, died on May 2 at her home in Central Point, Va. She was 68. Peggy Fortune, her daughter, said the cause was pneumonia. The Supreme Court ruling, in 1967, struck down the last group of segregation laws to remain on the books--those requiring separation of the races in marriage. The ruling was unanimous, its opinion written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, who in 1954 wrote the court's opinion in Brown v. Board of Education, declaring segregated public schools unconstitutional. In Loving v. Virginia, Warren wrote that miscegenation laws violated the Constitution's equal protection clause. ``We have consistently denied the constitutionality of measures which restrict the rights of citizens on account of race,'' he said. By their own widely reported accounts, Mrs. Loving and her husband, Richard, were in bed in their modest house in Central Point in the early morning of July 11, 1958, five weeks after their wedding, when the county sheriff and two deputies, acting on an anonymous tip, burst into their bedroom and shined flashlights in their eyes. A threatening voice demanded, ``Who is this woman you're sleeping with?'' Mrs. Loving answered, ``I'm his wife.'' Mr. Loving pointed to the couple's marriage certificate hung on the bedroom wall. The sheriff responded, ``That's no good here.'' The certificate was from Washington, D.C., and under Virginia law, a marriage between people of different races performed outside Virginia was as invalid as one done in Virginia. At the time, it was one of 16 states that barred marriages between races. After Mr. Loving spent a night in jail and his wife several more, the couple pleaded guilty to violating the Virginia law, the Racial Integrity Act. Under a plea bargain, their one-year prison sentences were suspended on the condition that they leave Virginia and not return together or at the same time for 25 years. Judge Leon M. Bazile, in language Chief Justice Warren would recall, said that if God had meant for whites and blacks to mix, he would have not placed them on different continents. Judge Bazile reminded the defendants that ``as long as you live you will be known as a felon.'' They paid court fees of $36.29 each, moved to Washington and had three children. They returned home occasionally, never together. But times were tough financially, and the Lovings missed family, friends and their easy country lifestyle in the rolling Virginia hills. By 1963, Mrs. Loving could stand the ostracism no longer. Inspired by the civil rights movement and its march on Washington, she wrote Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and asked for help. He wrote her back, and referred her to the American Civil Liberties Union. The A.C.L.U. took the case. Its lawyers, Bernard S. Cohen and Philip J. Hirschkop, faced an immediate problem: the Lovings had pleaded guilty and had no right to appeal. So they asked Judge Bazile to set aside his original verdict. When he refused, they appealed. The Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals upheld the lower court, and the case went to the United States Supreme Court. Mr. Cohen recounted telling Mr. Loving about various legal theories applying to the case. Mr. Loving replied, ``Mr. Cohen, tell the court I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can't live with her in Virginia.'' Mildred Delores Jeter's family had lived in Caroline County, Va., for generations, as had the family of Richard Perry Loving. The area was known for friendly relations between races, even though marriages were forbidden. Many people were visibly of mixed race, with Ebony magazine reporting in 1967 that black ``youngsters easily passed for white in neighboring towns.'' Mildred's mother was part Rappahannock Indian, and her father was part Cherokee. She preferred to think of herself as Indian rather than black. Mildred and Richard began spending time together when he was a rugged- looking 17 and she was a skinny 11-year-old known as Bean. He attended an all-white high school for a year, and she reached 11th grade at an all-black school. When Mildred became pregnant at 18, they decided to do what was elsewhere deemed the right thing and get married. They both said their initial motive was not to challenge Virginia law. ``We have thought about other people,'' Mr. Loving said in an interview with Life magazine in 1966, ``but we are not doing it just because somebody had to do it and we wanted to be the ones. We are doing it for us.'' In his classic study of segregation, ``An American Dilemma,'' Gunnar Myrdal wrote that ``the whole system of segregation and discrimination is designed to prevent eventual inbreeding of the races.'' But miscegenation laws struck deeper than other segregation acts, and the theory behind them leads to chaos in other facets of law. This is because they make any affected marriage void from its inception. Thus, all children are illegitimate; spouses have no inheritance rights; and heirs cannot receive death benefits. ``When any society says that I cannot marry a certain person, that society has cut off a segment of my freedom,'' the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said in 1958. Virginia's law had been on the books since 1662, adopted a year after Maryland enacted the first such statute. At one time or another, 38 states had miscegenation laws. State and federal courts consistently upheld the prohibitions, until 1948, when the California Supreme Court overturned California's law. Though the Supreme Court's 1967 decision in the Loving case struck down miscegenation laws, Southern states were sometimes slow to change their constitutions; Alabama became the last state to do so, in 2000. Mr. Loving died in a car accident in 1975, and the Lovings' son Donald died in 2000. In addition to her daughter, Peggy Fortune, who lives in Milford, Va., Mrs. Loving is survived by her son, Sidney, of Tappahannock, Va.; eight grandchildren; and 11 great-grandchildren. Mrs. Loving stopped giving interviews, but last year issued a statement on the 40th anniversary of the announcement of the Supreme Court ruling, urging that gay men and lesbians be allowed to marry.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Darrell R. Green, an NFL Hall of Famer, seven-time All-Pro defensive back for the Washington Redskins and founder of the Darrell Green Youth Life Foundation, upon his receiving the Commonwealth Academy Recognition for Educators, CARE, Award. Mr. Green is being honored for his visionary leadership in establishing the Darrell Green Youth Life Foundation, which provides support services to young people facing challenging life circumstances. Through his foundation, Mr. Green has opened the Youth Life Learning Center in the District of Columbia and affiliate centers in Richmond, Virginia, and Nashville, Tennessee. These centers provide comprehensive after-school and summer programs for at-risk teens and pre-teens. They offer academic enrichment and remedial education in the areas of reading, language arts, mathematics, supplemental services, mentoring and character development. In addition to providing these services, Mr. Green's foundation has created a National Training Institute where community leaders can learn how to launch similar programs in their own neighborhoods. A native of Houston, Texas, Darrell Green had an illustrious career with the Washington Redskins. He was a seven-time All-Pro defensive back, played in three Super Bowls and retired in 2002 after a heralded 20-year career. A top draft choice out of Texas A&I University, Darrell understood the power of an education, going back to school to complete his undergraduate degree which he earned in 1998 from St. Paul's College in Lawrenceville, Virginia. In 1999, Marymount University recognized Green for his extraordinary humanitarian work and conferred upon him the honorary degree of doctor of humane letters. Mr. Green has been breaking ground his entire life. At an early age he faced some very challenging circumstances. But, with the support of his high school coach and faith community, Darrell was able to overcome those obstacles, rising to become a celebrated pro athlete. This personal experience is what prompted him to create the foundation, so that at-risk young people can receive the support they also need to succeed. I am delighted to be presenting the prestigious CARE award to Darrell Green, an outstanding community leader who has worked tirelessly to enhance the lives of young people. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Darrell on this award and for his ongoing commitment to improving the lives of others.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Banking Committee under the leadership of Chairman Barney Frank who, this week, will take us in the direction that this Congress needs to lead the country. They will mark up a bill that will establish a substantial pool of funds that will enable local governments to be able to purchase foreclosed properties and turn them into affordable housing for families desperately in need of housing they can afford in this economy. They will also help families that are on the cusp of losing their homes to be able to keep their homes. This is so important. Mr. Speaker, as many as 7 million families will lose their homes by the end of this year. In fact, mortgage defaults are up by 72 percent. Local governments will lose $7 billion in property tax revenue that they desperately need for public safety and roads and all of the other municipal services that are so important. We are on the cusp of a recession. We need to act quickly and comprehensively to do the right thing. Chairman Frank's committee is doing the right thing. We need to support them.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, yesterday our constituents filed their tax returns, but I wonder how many American taxpayers realize that the average tax return will be consumed in less than half a second in the Iraq war. When we grant the President the additional $100 billion he is asking in emergency funding for Iraq, we will be spending $5,000 a minute and $12 billion a month in a lost cause. The American taxpayer is still paying for Iraq's garbage collection, their schools, their health clinics and their roads. When the Iraqi people themselves are running a surplus. They have almost $70 billion in accumulated surplus now. The last couple of years, they have had $100 billion come in from oil revenue, and they budgeted it at about $55 a barrel. It is now about $112 a barrel. They are generating an enormous surplus that they don't know what to do with, and a whole lot of it is being stolen. And yet we are paying still to collect their garbage. There is something wrong with this picture and the American taxpayer needs to stand up and speak out about it with a full measure of outrage.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, 1 year ago today, 32 students and faculty at Virginia Tech lost their lives when a deranged gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, opened fire on campus, indiscriminately killing and maiming everyone in his path. One of the most deadly school shootings in American history, the tragedy stunned the Nation and shook the school to its core. I cannot imagine how the parents and families of the victims dealt with the heartbreaking news that their loved ones, who they thought were in a safe learning environment, had become the victims of gun violence. On this one year anniversary, my thoughts and prayers go out to the victims, their families, and the entire Virginia Tech community as they continue to cope with the aftermath of that tragic day. But it is also important to honor the courage displayed by the entire Virginia Tech community during the days and weeks following the shooting. Students, faculty, parents, alumni, and Blacksburg residents all came together to help each other cope with the physical and psychological damage of the shooting. The resolve demonstrated by the Hokie community was one of the most poignant acts of solidarity that I have ever witnessed. Shortly after the tragedy, many of those affected chose to participate in initiatives to fix the laws that facilitated the perpetration of this crime. First among them was the deficient manner in which mental health records were added to the national background check system. Given his mental health history, had Seung-Hui Cho's information been handled properly he would have been prevented from purchasing the weapons used in the shooting. Responding to pressure from these citizen advocates, Congress passed the NICS Improvements Act, a law providing funding to States to insure that mental health records are added efficiently to the national background check system. This week, I had the pleasure of meeting yesterday with a survivor of the Virginia Tech massacre. Her name is Lily Habtu. Lily was shot in the jaw and arm during the violent melee. She described how the events of that day have forever changed her life. That trauma could have left Lily a shell of her former self, afraid to face a world that no longer made sense. Instead, Lily has become an activist, joining the Alexandria, VA-based organization called ProtestEasyGuns.com to stand up against the gun lobby so that others might never experience the pain she was forced to bear one year ago today. Right now, she is participating in a demonstration outside the Supreme Court, calling for commonsense legislation to close loopholes that make the purchase and possession of illegal firearms and the violence they perpetrate prevalent in our society. I am given strength by people like Lily. Rather than retreat from the world, they have channeled their experiences into a positive, fighting to prevent future acts of violence. But the sad fact is that not enough elected officials are willing to take a strong stand on gun safety issues. The problem is not confusion over what laws need to be implemented. Requiring universal background checks, closing the gun show loophole, preventing terror suspects from purchasing firearms, tightening laws against straw purchases, and banning weapons like the .50 caliber sniper rifle and the rapid-fire assault rifle are all positive steps that would reduce violent crime yet do not restrict the lawful ownership of firearms. The lack of action on these measures is not due to uncertainty over policy, but rather a lack of political courage. We will never forget the lives cut short on April 16, 2007, and the families and friends of the victims who continue to suffer today. But our sympathy for these victims is hollow unless it is matched with a determination to prevent gun violence. It is imperative Congress honor the memory of the Virginia Tech victims. As a body, we need to stand up before another tragedy occurs, by passing strong, responsible gun safety regulations.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise to commend my colleague Congressman Green for sponsoring this resolution to recognize and honor the 40th anniversary of congressional passage of title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, the Fair Housing Act, and the 20th anniversary of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988. It is important that we honor the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King and reflect on how far we have come. It is equally important, as we witness tens of thousands of Americans who risk losing their homes to foreclosure this year, that we rededicate ourselves to standing firm for those victimized by this economy or victimized by residual discrimination. We must continue to encourage all people and all three levels of government to rededicate themselves to the enforcement and the ideals of fair housing laws. The fair povision of housing and economic opportunity--and especially the drive to ensure safe shelter for those in need--has been a compelling foundation of my career in public service. As a council member and subsequently as mayor of Alexandria, I served as vice chairman of the Alexandria Economic Opportunity Commission when the commission began its efforts to ensure local, State, and Federal action to bring down the barriers in rental housing that so discriminated against single women with children. The enactment of the Fair Housing Act of 1988 was a testament to many of our former colleagues in this region, including former Congresswoman Gladys Spellman, former Senator Charles MacMathias, and former Delegate, Reverend Walter Fauntroy. That enactment was an honor to them and to thousands of Americans who joined in a national effort to seek justice and enduring rights for women in that most fundamental of human needs: shelter. In Alexandria, our commission--and our city--focus on special populations, such as at-risk preschool children and teens, the homeless, ex-offenders, single parents, as well as the low-income community in general. These populations, our most vulnerable, face enough of an uphill struggle everyday as it is without governmentally permitted discrimination. I am proud at what we were able to accomplish so many years ago, but I remain committed the vision that Dr. King and others set before us, which we honor and remember today.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I thank my friend, the distinguished delegate from Guam, for yielding me the time. I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman) for his kind comments as well. I am glad to be joined here by the Chair of Military Construction, Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee, Mr. Chet Edwards. Madam Speaker, a child's process of growing up is difficult, but imagine what it must be like when one parent or even both parents are deployed abroad as part of their duty in our Armed Forces. While friends and relatives pray for their safe return, no one feels the impact of deployment more than the children of servicemembers in combat overseas. We are learning more about the impact that living under this shadow of uncertainty has on our children. The incidence of military children needing psychological counseling has increased dramatically. Last year Children's Hospital in the District of Columbia had over 1,000 visits from military children suffering from behavioral and mental health problems. These are just normal kids who want what any child wants, their mothers and fathers at home to tuck them in at night reassuring them everything will be all right. Today more than 2,300,000 Americans demonstrate their courage and commitment every day to our Nation by serving in our Armed Forces. Of these men and women, most have families subjected to frequent moves from one installation to another, long deployments abroad, and the fear that their loved one serving overseas might never come home. Fifty percent of our troops deployed overseas have children that are left behind. That is more than one million children with at least one parent deployed overseas. Those figures, statistics, can too easily be ignored sometimes because they are abstract. But here is one that can't be dismissed: 3,400 children have already lost a parent serving in the Armed Forces over the past 6 years. When I introduced this resolution 2 years ago, the number of children who had lost a parent was 1,000 and now it is 3,400. The Department of Defense understands that without the families' support, they will never have the soldiers' full support. In 1986, Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger declared this month the ``National Month of the Military Child.'' Every year since, events at military bases, forts and other installations across the Nation have been held to celebrate the military family, replete with lots of lofty rhetoric but not enough true attention to their needs. Two bases in my own district, Fort Belvoir and Fort Myer, hold annual events providing military kids the chance to be distracted a bit by just being a kid with other kids in similar situations. But the Congress needs to step up. Today I am glad to join with my colleagues, particularly with my colleagues who will speak here today, to offer this resolution officially recognizing the month of April as the National Month of the Military Child, and dedicating the Congress to pay more attention to the children and the spouses of our soldiers. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle, Representative Issa and Walter Jones of North Carolina are bipartisan sponsors for this effort. I thank them for their support and leadership. This resolution is just a small way that Congress can recognize the sacrifice these youngsters and their families are asked to make, but it is an opportunity to commit ourselves to doing much more. Specifically, the resolution joins the Secretary of Defense in honoring military children, recognizing that they too share the burden and are making a great sacrifice in protecting our Nation. I would also like to take the opportunity to thank the organization Kids Serve Too. It is in my congressional district, and is dedicated to the needs of military families everywhere. It was created by military families to support other military families. Kids Serve Too sponsors activities and events for military children. It is represented in the gallery today specifically by Tricia Johnson and her daughters, Cat and Claire, and her sister, Kathleen Murphy. Madam Speaker, military families and their children deserve our heartfelt appreciation for their sacrifice. Today we honor them and their sacrifice and thank you for bringing this resolution to the floor. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my support of the United States Patent and Trademark Office's National Trademark Expo. After a 10-year hiatus, I am excited to join the USPTO in its efforts to recognize the vital role that trademarks play in the global economy. This 3-day event, beginning on April 10, 2008 will turn the USPTO's campus into a ``Trademark Theme Park,'' featuring themed displays, company booths, costumed characters, and much more. During the expo, costumed trademarked characters, including the Pillsbury Doughboy, Sprout, Hershey Kisses, and the Chocolate Bar will parade about the USPTO campus, and large inflatable characters including the ``Cat in the Hat,'' ``Thomas the Train,'' the ``Jolly Green Giant,'' and ``Shrek'' will decorate the grounds. Trademarks are valuable symbols of quality in our increasingly competitive global marketplace. On average, people are exposed to 1,500 trademarks each day and more than 30,000 if they make a trip to the grocery store. The exposition will feature celebrity trademarks, which are often subject to counterfeiting, unusual trademarks, the evolution of certain trademarks, the people behind the names of trademarks, and century-old registered trademarks. Exhibitors will include many of America's leading corporations, whose exhibits will highlight some of the benefits of Federal trademark registration. These exhibitors include the American National Red Cross, Burberry, The Travelers Companies, Inc., Starmaker Products, Microsoft Corporation, Owens Corning, Callaway Golf Company, Caterpillar, Inc., CMG Worldwide, NASCAR, YKK Corporation of America, UPS, Bridgestone Firestone, the International Trademark Association, INTA, and the International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition, IACC. The expo will emphasize the essential role the USPTO plays in approving Federal trademark registrations. In a time of globalization, counterfeit goods pose an increasing threat to American businesses. Trademarks protect words, names, symbols, sounds, or colors that identify and distinguish the goods of one party from those of others. The USPTO, an award-winning leader in handling electronic filings, will showcase the impact of electronic filing and processing of trademark applications. I applaud the USPTO for its efforts to educate the public on the role of trademarks during the National Trademark Expo, and I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing the USPTO at a time when trademarks and intellectual property rights play an increasingly important role in our global economy.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the T.C. Williams men's basketball team upon becoming this season's Virginia AAA state champions. Guided by Coach Ivan Thomas, on March 15, 2008 at the Siegel Center in Richmond, Virginia, the Titans ended Bethel High School's 29-game winning streak, surging to a commanding 70-57 victory and unprecedented 2nd state title. Led by a trio of sharpshooters, seniors Travis Berry, Anthony Winbush and junior Edward Jenkins--who combined for 59 of the teams 70 points-- the Titans started fast and never let up till the final buzzer sounded. The stifling T.C. team defense forced a whopping 20 turnovers, holding the opposition to only a 37 percent shooting percentage and less than 20 points in the first half. Madam Speaker, T.C. Williams High School has a proud tradition of excellence, both in the classroom and on the athletic fields. I stand today on the floor of the House, to salute the entire T.C. Williams community--students, faculty, parents and fans--on this year's unforgettable championship basketball season. May this victory inspire you to climb to even greater heights in the road ahead.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker are understandably trying to put a positive spin on the Iraq war. But the reality is that this has been the worst military fiasco in American history. But one of the questions I would like them to answer is how, when the Iraqi government has over $56 billion of revenue this year, they have the gall to ask the American taxpayer for another $170 billion? They have $40 billion in reserve that they have gotten from oil being over $100 a barrel. The American taxpayer is paying more than $3.30 a gallon for gas, and yet Iraq wants another $170 billion? They have got $10 billion in reconstruction funds. Yet we are going to continue to pay for all their needs? But that is what we are doing. We are paying for everything from military training, all the way down to garbage pickup, with American taxpayers' money, when they have got tens of billions of dollars that they choose not to spend. This is a disgrace, Madam Speaker. This policy has never been worthy of the sacrifice of our military families, let along their loved ones in uniform.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of this important bill. PEPFAR-funded programs have provided life-saving assistance in the fight against HIV/AIDS, and I welcome any expansion of this assistance. Additionally, I am pleased that we have removed the ``hard earmark'' requiring 33% of all prevention funds be spent on abstinence-only until marriage programs. Studies by GAO and the Institutes of Medicine found that the one-third earmark undermines successful HIV prevention efforts by limiting flexibility in developing countries. However, I continue to be concerned about any funds being directed towards unproven, ineffective programs using the ``abstinence- only'' approach. I worry that the new ``balanced funding'' requirement may cause mission directors and public health officials to be anxious about doing what they think Congress wants, instead of what is needed in the field. Public health experts on the ground are the ones who can best determine the mix of prevention activities, especially since what works for one culture may be disastrous for another. Even in our own country, young people who take part in abstinence-only education are less likely to use condoms. With 15,000 new HIV infections every day, the need for additional resources is clearly tremendous, and I'm extremely supportive of the goals of this important legislation, and I continue to believe that our highest priority should be funding science-based, comprehensive efforts to prevent HIV.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I would like to take a minute to recognize an enduring legacy of John F. Kennedy--the Peace Corps--in recognition of its 47th anniversary this year and to commend 44 constituents from Northern Virginia currently serving in 38 countries around the world. It is an honor to serve with the likes of my colleague and friend Chris Shays and others in this body and the other who served our country in the enhancement of citizen diplomacy. I hope all Americans will join us in supporting and expanding this enduring commitment to convey our values as a nation. As Fareed Zakaria wrote: ``We must begin to think about life after Bush--a cheering prospect for his foes, a dismaying one for his fans (however few there may be at the moment). In 10 months he will be a private citizen, giving speeches to insurance executives. America, however, will have to move on and restore its place in the world. To do this we must first tackle the consequences of our foreign policy of fear. Having spooked ourselves into believing that we have no option but to act fast, alone, unilaterally and preemptively, we have managed in six years to destroy decades of international good will, alienate allies, embolden enemies and yet solve few of the major international problems we face.'' The London Financial Times last December reported that the U.S. has suffered a significant loss of power and prestige around the world in the years since the beginning of this century, limiting our ability to influence international crises, according to an annual survey from a well regarded British security think-tank. The 2007 Strategic Survey of the non-partisan International Institute for Strategic Studies picked the decline of U.S. authority as one of the most important security developments of the past year--but suggested the fading of American prestige began earlier, largely due to its failings in Iraq. One of our most special and effective citizen agencies of public diplomacy is the Peace Corps. Think of this--more than 187,000 volunteers have served this venerable legacy of former President Kennedy, serving in 139 countries--where they bring our values to other peoples, and bring understanding and appreciation of other cultures back home. The greatest gift of the Peace Corps and other civilian programs is not just that ordinary Americans share their values and our culture with other peoples, but also that when volunteers return, they bring greater understanding and appreciation of other cultures. Foreign policy is not just what we do, but also who we are. America as a place has often been the great antidote to U.S. foreign policy-- and it should be again. Mr. Zakaria writes that ``When American actions across the world have seemed harsh, misguided or unfair, America itself has always been open, welcoming and tolerant * * *'' At the end of the day, our openness is our greatest foreign policy. We have succeeded not because of the ingenuity of our government, but rather because of efforts like this unique program to keep ourselves open to the world--to sending our people out across the countries of the world to share our unique culture, our goods and services, our ideas and inventions, our people and cultures. This openness, this civilian diplomacy, has allowed us to make friends across boundaries. It will be central to our place as a Nation in the future. This week, as we celebrate National Peace Corps Week, we honor the more than 190,000 volunteers who have served in 139 developing countries since President Kennedy's call to service in 1961--and I honor 44 of my constituents currently serving our country in places as diverse as China, Mali, Azerbaijan, Macedonia, El Salvador, and Namibia. This can be lonely and demanding service but service that can create enduring friendships and values that transcend boundaries and cultures. Today, more than 8,000 Peace Corps volunteers around the world are currently providing training and education in 74 countries. These volunteers each donate their time and skills for over two years, in order to make a difference in the world and to promote understanding between cultures. By offering their valuable skills and showing a passion for helping others, they show the world that Americans value learning and cross-cultural exchange. Volunteers work in areas of education, health and HIV/AIDS, business development, environment, agriculture and youth, and must often be creative and flexible when living and working in new cultures and learning new languages. The resulting experience is rewarding for all involved, and it highlights the importance of cooperation and involvement between cultures around the globe. When volunteers return home and share their overseas experiences with their communities, the Peace Corps helps Americans as much as the people in developing countries. From recent college graduates to doctors with decades of experience, volunteers choose to use their valuable skills and education to help people all over the world, but their work affects their lives long after returning home. This week we remember the dedication and passion of Peace Corps volunteers, young and old, current and returned. We thank them for their service, and encourage more Americans to volunteer with the Peace Corps.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, there are five compelling reasons why we should override the President's veto of this bill and sustain the congressional ban on torture: First of all, it creates a double standard between the military and our intelligence personnel. The rest of the world won't recognize the difference, and neither should we. Secondly, it gives us faulty information. Somebody being tortured will tell you whatever is necessary in order to stop the torture. Thirdly, it jeopardizes our own personnel, because the enemy will consider it a license to torture American prisoners. Fourth, it is illegal, according to the Geneva Conventions. Fifth, it is immoral, and thus it is un-American. Our Founding Fathers believed that this Nation would be united by a common set of values, that we would stand as a moral guidepost to the rest of the world. This undermines that moral high ground, and that is why this veto should be overridden.