Jim Matheson

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner).

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to do that, and I think I would put it in the following context. This is not easy to balance this budget. It is going to require a lot of really tough choices, tough political choices. What the Blue Dogs have decided is we need to put in a structure for this institution and for the White House, for the President and Congress to work within a structure that is going to guide us on the path of fiscal responsibility because without that structure it is just too easy to deficit spend. That is what has been going on around here. It will take some tough choices. We do not deny that at all. We are ready to work with people, but it will have to be all of us working together to take on those tough choices. So what the Blue Dogs have done is they have tried to establish a 12- point proposal to set up a structure that addresses some of the issues we have talked about here tonight. For instance, I talked about contingency planning when my colleague, Mr. Boyd, plans his family business budget, which we called one of our 12 points for a rainy day fund, or the Federal Government plans for things that you cannot articulate at the start of the year. Thirty-five States in this country have rainy day funds. Apparently, we thought that was not appropriate for the United States of America, but we know every year something happens. Natural disasters may happen. We do not know what it is going to be, but we know we ought to plan. That is one of our 12 points. We talked about accountability earlier, the fact that you can't get a clean audit from most agencies. One of our 12 points is, you know what, any Federal agency that cannot give us a clean audit and properly balance their books, we freeze their budget at the previous year's level. They are stuck. That has some real teeth in it, and that is going to motivate that agency to do the right thing and give you a clean budget. Another point of the Blue Dog 12-point plan is going to be acquiring a balanced budget amendment for the Constitution. Now this will be appropriately written with exceptions for times of war and natural disaster. But I think that is something we need. As I said earlier, we need a structure. We need something to force Congress and the White House to move toward a balanced budget, and that balanced budget amendment in our Constitution is a key component of making that happen. Another part of the 12-point plan is something called pay-as-you-go. Now, we throw these terms out a lot. People may not know what that means, but it is a pretty basic concept. That means if you have got something new, a new program you want to spend money on, guess what, you have to pay for it. You can do it by taking money away from a another program or raising revenues. Same thing if you reduce revenues someplace, you have got to pay for it by cutting spending or raising revenues someplace else. It is something that every family deals with in their household budget, what every business deals with. It is a responsible way to look at things. This isn't a new idea. This is something that the Congress was working with before. In fact, these rules were in place from 1990 until 2002. Then they expired, and while the Blue Dogs have advocated putting the pay-as-you-go rules back in place, we can't get a vote out here on the floor of the House to do that. Because as I said earlier, in the short term, it is a lot easier to govern if you do not have to make the tough decisions and you would rather deficit spend. But if we put those rules back in place, it is going to force people to make the tough decisions. As an aside, I might add, Alan Greenspan who just retired after 18 years as head of the Federal Reserve, and he has such a great reputation in terms of his economic model, he made a rather prophetic statement back in 2001. This is just when we finished a couple of years of surplus. He was testifying before Congress. He said, ``With today's euphoria surrounding the surpluses, it is not difficult to imagine the hard-earned fiscal restraint developed in recent years rapidly dissipating. We need to resist those policies that would readily resurrect the deficits of the past and the fiscal imbalances that followed in their wake.'' He sure was right, because by November of 2005 he came back before Congress, and in testimony he said, ``Our budget position is unlikely to improve substantially further until we restore constraints similar to the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, which were allowed to lapse in 2002.'' That was the pay-as-you-go provision that existed before. So we have proof. We have a track record that shows that these rules worked. Without these rules, we have seen us spin into tremendous fiscal imbalance. It is another one of the Blue Dog points. There are 12 points. I thankfully may not go through all 12 of the points tonight, but I wanted to highlight some of the ones that we have talked about tonight, and ones that I think anyone in this country, regardless of political party understands, and they know it is the right thing to do. I encourage, again, any colleague in the House of Representatives should know the Blue Dogs want to engage them on this issue. If these 12 points that we have come up with aren't the perfect solution, and somebody has a better idea, we welcome the chance to have a dialogue with them. Because these are not easy issues, and we have got to work together to work this one out. But I think the 12-point plan represents a thoughtful process and a good start for setting up a structure that will force this institution to put us back on the path to fiscal responsibility, and so we can avoid increasing, and I will close with coming back to the comments I started with. That is not increasing the problem of that birth tax, that we called it, that was employed on the son I had just 3\1/2\ weeks ago, that my wife had actually, my new son, came into this world owing $27,000. That is not right, it is not fair, and we have got to do something to make sure we do not grow that anymore.

Mr. MATHESON. I appreciate my Blue Dog colleagues joining me tonight. This is an issue we feel strongly about, and we are sincere when we ask our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work with us on this because we think it so important to the future of this country.

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I think that really centers on a fundamental issue about the way our Constitution was set up. This is not supposed to be driven by party when it comes to oversight. When they wrote up our Constitution, they created the three branches of government. We all learn this in grade school. It is called the checks and balances. There is an institutional role for the legislative branch to play. We legislate but we also keep an eye on the executive branch and on the judicial branch, and we do that through oversight. We are supposed to be asking questions. It is all what makes the government accountable. It is pursuing good government. It is not looking for a scandal or anything like that. This is just basically making the trains run on time, ask the right questions. We know that is not happening right now, and so you mentioned 16 out of 22 major agencies cannot even give you a clean audit of their books. The government cannot tell you where they spent $24.5 billion in the last fiscal year. That is enough to fund the entire Department of Justice, and we do not know where the money is, and Congress is not asking the questions. It should not be a party issue. We all ought to be asking these questions; and I know the Blue Dogs, as much as anybody in this Congress, are ready to work with anybody because it is an America-first issue, not a Democrat or Republican issue. It is about putting this country in the right position and doing the right thing. So this issue of accountability and oversight that my two colleagues have been talking about rings real true with me in terms of what the Framers of the Constitution asked us to do. That is our role here. We took an oath to uphold that Constitution. My concern is the non- oversight. I hope we do take action. I hope this conversation helps spur some action in this body, because it is the right thing to do.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, Nevada Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign introduced federal legislation today to mandate that nuclear waste be stored on-site at nuclear power plant sites. I'm proud to join my colleague from Nevada, Shelley Berkley, in introducing legislation in the House to mandate that nuclear waste be stored on-site. The West--whether it is Utah's Skull Valley or Nevada's Yucca Mountain--should not be the de facto dumping ground for nuclear waste. Storing nuclear waste on site is the safest, most reasonable and most effective way of allowing nuclear power plants to continue operating while we search for an appropriate long-term storage solution. The Utah and Nevada delegations are united on this--Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter from Nevada, and Chris Cannon and Rob Bishop from my home state of Utah have joined in this fight on the House side and our senators, Bob Bennett and Orrin Hatch are cosponsors of the Senate bill. Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the federal government has so far only focused on the flawed Yucca Mountain proposal for a central repository for spent nuclear fuel rods. Given the wealth of concerns about incomplete scientific evidence and falsified documentation stemming from the Yucca proposal and the clear gaps in transportation security for waste sent to the West, on-site storage is a much better solution. Dry cask storage--the method proposed by a private entity that wants to store waste on the Skull Valley site in Utah--is currently being used at 33 nuclear power plants around the country. As approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, dry cask containers can safely store waste for at least 100 years. We should not subject citizens to the dangers posed by transporting it through their communities when it can remain where it is. The Spent Nuclear Fuel On-Site Storage Security Act of 2005 would require commercial nuclear utilities to transfer nuclear waste from spent nuclear fuel pools into dry storage casks. For spent fuel currently in pools, a contractor licensed to handle spent nuclear fuel would have up to 6 years, to allow sufficient time for cooling and construction, to transfer spent nuclear fuel from pools into dry casks. Any new spent nuclear fuel produced after enactment, also has no more than 6 years to cool, before being transferred into dry casks. Such continuous transfer would mean that the pools are never at capacity, leaving less waste exposed and making the site safer. This bill would also require the Department of Energy to take title of all spent nuclear fuel currently in on-site dry cask storage and would even compensate the utility companies for expenses associated with transferring and storing the waste. This means that DOE will be responsible for possession, stewardship, maintenance, and monitoring of the spent nuclear fuel on-site, which is entirely appropriate. DOE was supposed to begin taking title to spent nuclear fuel in 1998, but because of the myriad of technical, scientific, legal and political problems surrounding the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, this has not happened. Taking title to spent nuclear fuel fulfills the federal government's obligation and commitment to retake control over nuclear materials. I thank my colleagues for their support of this legislation.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, I am very pleased to have worked with Representative Fitzpatrick on this important legislation, and I thank him for his leadership, and I also thank the House leadership and Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank for getting this important bill to the floor in such an expeditious manner. H.R. 2892 is a simple bill that will increase opportunities for our Nation's seniors to meet their own financial needs. H.R. 2892, the Reverse Mortgages to Help America's Seniors Act, will eliminate the cap on the volume of federally insured home equity conversion mortgages, or reverse mortgages as they are called. These unique loans enable senior homeowners to convert part of the equity in their homes to tax-free income without having to sell the home, give up title or take on a new monthly mortgage. Instead of making monthly payments to the lender, as with a regular mortgage, the lender makes payments to the homeowner. The majority of loan recipients are elderly widows. Under current law, the HUD Home Equity Conversion Mortgage, or reverse mortgage program, is capped at $250,000 loans. Removing the cap will provide stability and greater competition in a program that has proven to be useful for many seniors. This bill is cost-effective for taxpayers and consumers. In fact, CBO estimates that lifting the cap will raise revenues by about $8 million in 2007 and $39 million annually in subsequent years. This legislation is supported by AARP, the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association and others. Again, I want to thank Mr. Fitzpatrick for his leadership on this bill, and I want to also thank Mr. Oxley and Mr. Frank, and I encourage my colleagues to vote for this important legislation to provide other seniors with greater tools for managing their expenses. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, I want to say again that I thank Representative Fitzpatrick and urge passage of the legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, later on today, the House is going to vote on a budget reconciliation package and, from what we are hearing, up is down and down is up. We are supposed to be here to be lowering the deficit. I am concerned about the deficit. We should not be burdening future generations with our consumption today. Yet the package being put forth today by the majority, the package of spending cuts, but also tax cuts, is going to end up with an increase in our deficit of $16 billion. That is not right. Look, deficit reduction is hard to do. It requires some tough choices. The only way, in my opinion, that this Congress is going to take on those tough choices is if we put in a set of rules that force us to do it. The Blue Dog Democrats have a 12-point plan that will put those provisions in place: a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, real pay-as-you-go rules. Those are just two of the 12 provisions that would require this Congress to come together and make those very tough decisions; and they will be tough, let us not deny it. Mr. Speaker, if we want to show fiscal responsibility, if we want to do right by future generations, we will come together in a bipartisan way. That is not what is happening today. It is very unfortunate. I encourage my colleagues to vote down this package today.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to recognize the life and contributions of Robert H. Hinckley, Jr. A lifelong resident of the State of Utah, Mr. Hinckley's 88 years were distinguished by his optimism, energy, and a commitment to public service. Robert Hinckley, Jr. was born as the first child of Robert H. Hinckley Sr. and Abrelia Clarissa Seely Hinckley in Mt. Pleasant, UT, although he grew up in Ogden, UT and always considered that his home. Growing up during the Depression era, Hinckley began working in the family's business, Hinckley Dodge. After graduation from Ogden High School, he attended Stanford University and then the United States Military Academy from which he graduated in 1942. He married Janice Scowcroft, his high school sweetheart, in 1944 and described their 63 years of marriage as the ``very best part of my life.'' During World War II and Korea, he was a decorated pilot earning the U.S. Air Force's Distinguished Flying Cross and the Bronze Star. Following a 13-year military career, he returned to Utah to manage the family's automobile business in Salt Lake City, UT. Outside of business, Hinckley loved horses and owned Arabian horses. He counted his greatest success as his four children, all of whom survive him. Hinckley's life demonstrated commitment to his community. In 1988, he built upon his father's legacy becoming board chairman of the Hinckley Institute of Politics at the University of Utah. In this capacity, he was a champion for intelligent, thoughtful, and ethical engagement in the public arena. He encouraged students of all political persuasions to approach public service and politics with a sense of purpose and diligence. He worked hard to create opportunities for all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, to have access to internship opportunities. He dramatically stepped up the activities of the Hinckley Institute and oversaw the doubling of its endowment. This year the Hinckley Institute of Politics is celebrating its 40th anniversary. Over 4,000 interns have served local, State, and Federal offices, interest groups, polling firms, and campaigns since 1965. The Hinckley Institute pioneered the Utah State legislative internship program, and interns now serve in critical staffing capacities during every general session. The Hinckley Institute internship program has been studied by colleges and universities across the United States. The Hinckley Institute sponsors the Hinckley Journal of Politics, an undergraduate research publication. It is one of only four undergraduate political science journals nationwide. The Hinckley Institute has influenced countless local, State, and Federal elected officials, party activists, lobbyists, journalists, and citizens. Recent studies of former Hinckley interns demonstrate an incredibly high degree of civic engagement, through many avenues, for years after graduation. The Institute has provided a needed center for intelligent, thoughtful, dynamic conversation about important issues, where students can test their beliefs and access opportunities for empowerment within their community and government. Robert Hinckley's philanthropic commitment to education and students extends beyond the on-going value of the Hinckley Institute of Politics, including the establishment and funding of scholarships at the University of Utah, Utah State University, Weber State University, and Brigham Young University. In this capacity, as well, he and his family have helped create a large community of educated, actively engaged, ethical, and interested citizens. In all his endeavors, Hinckley was noted for his positive outlook and energy. His contributions will long benefit the students and people of Utah. He was truly an asset to his community and will be greatly missed.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of a resolution honoring the Gold Star Mothers of America. As a parent, I can only imagine the pain that is felt by surviving family members after the death of child. To the Gold Star Mothers in Utah and throughout our Nation, this nation is deeply in your debt. Your children served this great country of ours and they have paid the highest price. We can ask no more of any American. In the past 3 years, I have had the honor and the privilege to meet many soldiers as they leave for war. These brave soldiers are not complaining in their last moments in America, rather, they are strong, and proud to serve this country. They remind me that the price of freedom is terribly high. It's a cost they have agreed to bear, but those of us here at home cannot take it for granted. The American Gold Star Mothers organization was founded by Grace Darling Seibold after the death of her son in 1918, during World War I. Somehow, through her pain and her loss, Grace still managed to devote her time to organizing a group of other mothers who had lost soldiers in combat. In the years since the Gold Star Mothers was founded, these women have always honored fallen soldiers and they have channeled their own grief into lessening the pain of other families. It's easy to talk about the sacrifices made by brave Americans, but the pain and the memories are always carried by the loved ones left behind. Many families have soldiers who come home wounded; some families have soldiers who do not make it home at all. The hardship that these families face may seem unbearable and it is our duty as members of Congress to do whatever we can to ease their burden. Homes in Utah that have received Gold Stars, Purple Hearts, folded flags and last letters home know the price of freedom. They pray to end this war and all wars, so that others may be spared such a loss. I believe that we will never be able to thank those soldiers and their families enough for the sacrifice that they make, but I do believe we should try. This resolution is one small way for us to honor mothers who have lost children in service to this nation. I am proud to support making September 25th Gold Star Mothers Day.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the Congress' attention what I have determined to be a loophole in the Montgomery GI bill education benefits. I have a local Marine reserve unit in Utah, Fox Company. They have served two different tours of active duty since September 11. One member was killed in Iraq, several sustained injuries. And yet when they returned after their second tour of duty and applied for Montgomery GI bill education benefits, they were denied because they did not put in 24 consecutive months. This is clearly not what was anticipated when the bill was first written; and yet now with our reliance on Guard and Reserve, this circumstance is going to repeat itself more and more. The gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) and I earlier this year introduced H.R. 772, which will close this loophole. It will allow our soldiers who put in 24 months of consecutive duty within a 5-year period to qualify for full Montgomery GI bill education benefits. This is the right thing to do. It is not a partisan issue. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring H.R. 722.

Mr. MATHESON

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

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues to oppose the previous question. Our Nation is facing a number of challenges. We are fighting a war against terror that will continue to require significant attention and resources. We are facing historic budget deficits with a national debt of almost $8 trillion. Our country has pressing needs in education, health care, veterans services and other areas. With all of those challenges before us now, now is not the time for Members of the Congress to be voting themselves a pay raise. We need to be willing to make sacrifices. We need to behave like American families who make tough choices every day. We need to budget, live within our means, and make careful spending decisions based on our more pressing priorities. A no vote on the previous question will allow Members to vote up or down on the automatic cost of living pay raise for Members of Congress. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule. My amendment will block the fiscal year 2006 cost of living pay raise for Members of Congress. Because this amendment requires a waiver, the only way to get to this issue is to defeat the previous question. So again, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chairman, this week marks the 95th birthday of Gordon Bitner Hinckley, the 15th President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Gordon B. Hinckley was born on June 23, 1910 to Bryant and Ada Hinckley in Salt Lake City, Utah. The day Hinckley was born, a can of Campbell's soup cost 10 cents, a man's shirt was less than $1 and beef sold for 30 cents a pound in Salt Lake City. Growing up in Salt Lake City, young Gordon spent summers on the family fruit farm in the rural Salt Lake Valley. He and his brother Sherman often slept out under the stars in the box of an old farm wagon where they lay on their backs, picking out familiar stars. They also weeded and irrigated the family garden, looked after livestock, and dug fence post holes. In 1923, when President Warren G. Harding visited SLC, Gordon and his siblings helped line the streets to wave flags as the President's motorcade came into town. In 1928, just a year before the onset of the Depression, Gordon Hinckley enrolled at the University of Utah thinking he might become an architect. But he loved English literature, particularly Shakespeare, and he decided to go into journalism instead. From 1933 to the summer of 1935, he served as a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the British Isles. In addition to the hard work of proselytizing, he led efforts there to improve relations with the press, published articles, and wrote eloquent letters home. Upon returning to Utah, he accepted a job as executive secretary of the newly formed Church Radio, Publicity and Mission Literature Committee. In this capacity he led the public relations and media efforts of the Church, grasping and utilizing new electronic media to modernize the delivery of the Church of Jesus Christ's message. He married the late Majorie Pay on April 29, 1937 and together they had 5 children and 25 grandchildren. By the time he became President of the Church on March 13, 1995, he had labored nearly 60 years at Church headquarters--38 years of service as a General Authority and 15 of those in the First Presidency. During the last 10 years, President Hinckley has traveled extensively throughout the world meeting with dignitaries and members of the Church. Through these meetings, he has reinforced his statement that, ``Good homes produce good people. Good homes become the foundation for the strength of any nation.'' In writing and speaking, he has encouraged church membership and others to strengthen their homes and families and cultivate virtues such as love, honesty, civility, mercy, industry, and gratitude. As the leader of the ninth largest religion in the United States, he has overseen significant international building efforts, worldwide expansion of church membership, and has been noted for his openness to the press. He has endeared himself to Church members and others he meets with attributes developed in his earlier years: hard work, an ease with language, a dry wit, and a genuine love for people. In addition to Church service, President Hinckley has been active in community affairs, receiving numerous honors, including the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2004. He wrote, ``My plea is that we stop seeking out the storms and enjoy more fully the sunlight. I am suggesting that as we go through life, we `accentuate the positive.' I am asking that we look a little deeper for the good.'' President Hinckley has embodied this positive attitude throughout his 95 years and shared it vigorously during his last 10. I hope that my colleagues will join me in wishing a very happy 95th birthday to this great man and leader.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chairman, for the past few years, I have voted to redirect funding in support of smart bombs and other weapons that are actually usable against hardened, deeply buried targets. I'm pleased to see that this appropriations bill provides funding for conventional studies to defeat hard and deeply buried targets. I also understand that the funding provided within this bill for B2 bomber integration efforts is also intended for non-nuclear earth penetrators. Last month, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that the use of a nuclear ``bunker buster'' would cause massive civilian causalities if used. That's assuming we can overcome serious design problems and assuming we can live with the consequences of putting U.S. troops in danger from radioactive fallout if we ever used an RNEP or a similar weapon. In the past, Utahns suffering from cancer as a result of radioactive fallout exposure had to wait to receive compensation because federal funds ran out. It's wrong to spend precious dollars on unusable fantasy weapons that our military doesn't seem to need or want. We live in an era when terrorism and national security concerns dominate the political landscape, as well they should. We should focus limited funding dollars on usable warheads that can actually make a difference in combating our enemies. I have always been a strong supporter of the military and I'm well aware of the unconventional war we face against terrorists. However, the threats we face as a nation provide the best reason for Congress to fund only the best usable weaponry to support American soldiers. Many of my colleagues in the House recognize the importance of this issue and they share my concerns about competing efforts in the Senate to fund RNEP. I hope that during conference negotiations on this bill, the conferees maintain this language.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chairman, two long years have passed since our soldiers left for Iraq. We all have constituents serving overseas now and it's these brave men and women and their families that I keep in mind these days. I wish that we had more people on their way home, than on their way to Iraq right now. Last week, soldiers from the Triple Deuce--a field artillery battalion headquartered in my district--left home for final training at Camp Shelby. After that they'll be sent to Iraq for the next year. Members of the Triple Deuce include a small town mayor, a local fire chief and many ordinary citizens who--when we are not at war--make up the fabric of everyday life in Utah. These Americans are in the infantry. They're going to serve our country in a dark corner of the Middle East and I'm very worried about them. But I do know that they have lots of loved ones and fellow Utahns back home thinking about them and praying for them. I heard that their family and friends lined the streets of St. George today to say goodbye and I wish I could have been there too. This is a good bill--I'm proud to support it. My vote will go towards more armor, more vehicles, better weapons, and better compensation for the countless soldiers who are serving our country. We all want these brave Americans to return home as soon as possible. I believe that we need to accurately measure our progress in Iraq and continue taking care of our troops. Passage of this legislation demonstrates our commitment to our brave men and women in uniform and acknowledges that they need resources in order to accomplish their mission and return home safely. It also offers support for the families when a loved one pays the ultimate sacrifice in the cause of fighting for freedom.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chairman, my home state of Utah is particularly fortunate to have a number of dedicated individuals working in law enforcement to protect our citizens. These days, we all tend to focus on the armed forces, which are obviously a critical element of national defense. But it is also important to remember those on the front lines here at home. Local law enforcement officers need Congress' help to ensure that our streets stay safe for law-abiding citizens. I'm very disappointed that this bill cuts funding for Byrne Grants, COPS grants, Juvenile Justice programs, and Drug Courts. During my time in Congress, every single person involved with law enforcement has made it a point to share with me exactly how these grants help protect Utah citizens. I don't think we can say enough about the men and women who use this funding to better patrol our streets, decrease the availability of drugs in our schools, and ensure that each and every citizen is safe and protected. Officer safety and the ability to investigate major crimes are often compromised by a lack of resources. One of the local police chiefs in a small town in my district said to me last year: Jim, I'm not worried about Al Qaeda attacking our little town. I'm worried about dealing with drugs in our middle school down the street. Every single day, acts of heroism and valor are performed by police officers across our nation. We have made tremendous progress in terms of crime prevention and crime solving, but we need to remember that there are only so many available law enforcement officers at a given time. As our society grows, the demands placed on these individuals have also increased tremendously. The best way that the federal government can serve local law enforcement is to actually provide the grant money that is best utilized by people on the beat. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the amendments that will be offered later today to increase funding for Byrne grants and COPS grants. I truly thank the members of law enforcement across this nation for their service and I commit to working in support of both homeland security and domestic security. Before I close, I also want to add that there are some good things about this bill too. I'm very pleased to see that the bill does not transfer responsibility or reduce funding for the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Program. This program is very important to police chiefs and sheriffs in Utah and in other western states. This bill also fully funds the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program, which is another great program that does exactly what we all say federal dollars should do. MEP helps small businesses avail themselves of technological improvements and best practices that allow them to grow. Members of Congress tend to agree that growth in our manufacturing sector is critical and it seems to me that we should support that goal by supporting the MEP program. In closing, I recognize that we're facing an extremely tight budget. That's exactly why we should prioritize law enforcement and other aspects of our government that best help our citizens and make good use of limited federal dollars.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to share my remarks on H.R. 1812, the Patient Navigator Outreach and Chronic Disease Prevention Act. I rise in strong support of this important legislation. H.R. 1812 would authorize the Department of Health and Human Services to make grants for the development and operation of a pilot ``patient navigator program.'' This demonstration project would provide Community Health Centers, National Cancer Institute centers, Indian Health Service centers, Rural Health Clinics, and other health providers with funding to help patients ``navigate'' what can often be a complicated and confusing health care system. Under this legislation, patient navigators would help individual patients and their families overcome obstacles to the prompt diagnosis and treatment of their diseases by helping them understand the processes for receiving medical care and insurance, helping them coordinate referrals between different providers and specialists, helping them identify and possibly enroll in life-saving clinical trials, and even helping them manage their treatment plans. The bill ensures that particular attention is paid to patients with significant barriers to high-quality health care services including those who are geographically isolated, those with cultural or linguistic barriers, and the uninsured. In their endorsement of this important legislation, the American Cancer Society noted that despite notable advances in prevention interventions, screening technologies, and high-quality treatments, a disproportionate burden of cancer falls on the uninsured, those who live in rural areas, and minority and other medically underserved populations. These populations have higher risks of developing cancer and poorer chances of early diagnosis, optimal treatment, and survival. I believe that this pilot project will be helpful in providing patients with much-needed information. As receiving a diagnosis of cancer or another chronic disease can be overwhelming for an individual and their family members, this pilot project should ensure that information is available in an accessible, understandable format. I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this en bloc amendment to the Defense bill. I have offered an amendment to the bill that would require the Department of Defense to preserve irreplaceable historical records related to radioactive fallout, and I am pleased this amendment was ruled in order and is part of this en bloc amendment. Now currently the Department of Energy has ordered a moratorium on the destruction of such records, but the Department of Defense has no such prohibition and relevant records could potentially be lost. The National Academy of Sciences has pointed out that both the Navy and the Air Force have important documents that should be archived. As a result, the National Academy urged Congress to require better preservation of historical data related to radioactive fallout records. That is exactly what this amendment does. My amendment prohibits the Department of Defense from destroying these historical records and directs the Department to identify, preserve, and publish information contained in these records. Atmospheric testing was a dark period in our history for many Americans. We should do whatever we can to preserve the limited records from that time so they remain viable for scientific study. With this amendment we are taking a good first step toward preserving history.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this bipartisan amendment, which would benefit counties and local governments in 49 States. The Federal Government makes PILT payments to counties that have Federal lands to make up for the revenue local governments lose because they cannot collect property taxes on the Federal lands within their borders. Congress has chosen to underfund these PILT payments--leaving local governments in nearly every State with less funding for education, law enforcement, firefighting, search-and-rescue, and other services. In my congressional district alone, localities have lost over 48 million dollars in PILT funding because of inadequate appropriations by Congress over the last ten years. The bipartisan amendment we are discussing today would bring the Federal Government's payments for PILT a bit closer to the authorized funding level, helping local governments in 49 States. I encourage you to vote for this bipartisan amendment, which is a key step toward meeting Congress' commitment to our local governments.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and pay tribute to the late Mrs. Alberta Henry, a long-time resident of Utah. Mrs. Henry was a civil-rights activist and educator devoted to providing educational opportunities for all children. Her accomplishments and hard work have been recognized by many including President Richard Nixon, the University of Utah, and the Salt Lake Council of Women's Hall of Fame. Since being elected to Congress, I have been impressed with Mrs. Henry's efforts to improve her community, and ability to overcome all obstacles that stand in her way. Mrs. Henry has been involved in many organizations, including Utah State Advisory Committee to the U.S. commission on Civil Rights, the United Way, Utah Endowment for the Humanities, and the Black Advisory Board to the University of Utah. She also served as president of the NAACP's Salt Lake Branch for 12 years. Mrs. Henry's passion for education began early on as a young student in Kansas. Her mother encouraged her to get an education, and became a driving force in her love for learning. After moving to Utah, she worked for the Head Start Day Care and was the first African-American employee at the Salt Lake School District. She is also the founder of the Alberta Henry Education Foundation which has helped hundreds of underprivileged students pay for college. Mrs. Henry's work is invaluable and her steadfastness is respected. She will be missed by her family, friends, and the community as a whole.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, passage of this legislation demonstrates our commitment to our brave men and women in uniform and acknowledges that they need resources in order to accomplish their mission and return home safely. It also offers support for the families when a loved one pays the ultimate sacrifice in the cause of fighting for freedom. All along, I've been concerned about the lack of progress reports coming from the Pentagon. This bill finally requires the Pentagon to use real performance indicators to report to Congress with our progress in terms of security, economic, and Iraqi security force training goals. The money that will go directly to help our troops is of course the most important part of this bill. It increases the military death gratuity to $100,000 and increases life insurance benefits to $400,000 for families of soldiers killed while on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. We've all been hearing reports about the lack of adequate personal and vehicle armor. Congress has funded these critical protections in the past and we're doing so once again in this bill. I hope that this money will quickly be turned around to provide the needed add-on vehicle armor kits, new trucks, more night-vision equipment, and essential radio jammers to defeat the roadside bombs that are injuring and killing our troops almost every day. Our troops should not be compromised. Resolving the current instability in the region is in the long-term best interests of all Americans--failure in Iraq would lead to irreparable consequences. Thousands of American troops have been in Iraq for more than 2 years. We have to take care of them and ensure that they can come back home as soon as possible.

Mr. MATHESON

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth), who is a true leader on all Native American issues, and I know she has great concern on housing issues as well.

Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is important that we are considering this bill today on the House floor. I do commend the leadership of the Committee on Financial Services, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), and the leadership of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters). They exhibit bipartisanship in an effort to get legislation done that is important, and that is why we are here today. I certainly thank my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi). The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) and I share the privilege and honor of representing the Navajo Nation. I can tell you the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) has been a tireless advocate for Navajo issues and Native American issues in general, and I value the relationship I have had with him working on those issues. This bill, H.R. 797, the Native American Housing Enhancement Act, is an important bill in making a few simple changes to current law that will improve Native American access to housing. Last year, and quite frankly, this was at the instigation of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), there was a field hearing that took place on the Navajo Reservation; and the Committee on Financial Services sponsored this field hearing, which I believe is the first housing field hearing ever to take place on the reservation. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), along with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), and I toured parts of the reservation before the hearing, heard from many witnesses from a number of tribes, and we learned a lot during that hearing. We saw some startling things, and we learned a lot that needs to be addressed. We learned the poverty rate for Native Americans is twice that of the rest of the U.S. population; that many Native Americans continued to live in appalling housing conditions, even as those in much of the Nation have improved, and we saw some of those conditions when we toured the reservation. American Indians and Alaskan native populations live in housing that is often and justifiably compared to third-world nations. One out of every five Indian homes lacks complete plumbing facilities. Over 90,000 American Indians and Alaska Natives are homeless or underhoused. So I am so pleased that as a result of the subcommittee hearing out on the reservation and the testimony we heard that the bipartisan work of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) and of others that we are bringing to the floor today can help address at least some of these issues. This bill will not address all of the challenges associated with Native American housing, but it will provide progress on the issue. It takes a positive step by stretching existing resources and creating flexibility in the delivery of housing for Native Americans. Specifically, the bill will amend the current law to explicitly direct the Department of Housing and Urban Development to allow tribes unrestricted access to new Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determination Act funds, even if they still retain program income funds from previous years. You have heard that described by a couple of speakers before me. This is so important, because sometimes when investments get made in new housing, there is a rental stream or income that comes off of that housing; and if the law is interpreted in a way we do not want to have happen, it prevents new funds from coming in to move ahead with additional housing programs. This act today addresses that problem so we can continue to make progress. The bill will also amend the Housing Act of 1949 and will bring USDA housing programs into line with HUD Indian housing programs in allowing Indian preference. Finally, of course, the bill will reinstate Indian access to YouthBuild grants. The grants are part of a Housing and Urban Development Department program that provides job training and academic assistance to low-income young people. Ensuring that tribes are eligible to create for YouthBuild grants will fill a void in access to funding for youth programs in Indian Country. So as I said, this bill does take some important steps forward in addressing the housing needs of Native Americans. Beyond that, there are two other lessons I think we can learn from this bill, and I think a lot of people in Congress might want to pay attention to this. The first is, I think, we worked the way we are supposed to work. We heard from constituents, we went and conducted a field hearing, we listened to a lot of tribes from around this country. We took that information back through the leadership of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi). We have now formed legislation to address some of the problems that were appropriately brought to our attention during the hearing process, and this legislation is before us today. If it passes, as I am confident it will, hopefully it will move in the other body as we will and we will make some progress on an issue. That is why we are elected in this body, is to make progress on issues. The second lesson is the relationship that the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) has exhibited in working with folks on the other side of the aisle. It is a valuable bipartisan relationship. It is the way you get things done around here. So I commend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) on his leadership on this issue, and I thank my colleagues for bringing the bill to the floor. I certainly encourage this bill's adoption. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.