Thad McCotter

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge the Michigan Chapter of the Paralyzed Veterans of America in partnering with Ford Motor Company to release ``The Ford Michigan Mobility Resource Guide'' during their Open House in Novi, Michigan, on April 12, 2007. For nearly five decades, the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America have loyally served our community's veterans with spinal cord injury or disease. A congressionally chartered veteran's service organization, the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America have faithfully honored its commitment to advocate for improved health care access, research and development for spinal cord injury and spinal cord dysfunction, sports programs; and have enhanced the benefits and disability rights on behalf of all paralyzed veterans. In honor of Michigan Paralyzed Veteran Awareness Week, April 8, 2007, through April 14, 2007, the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America have partnered with Ford Motor Company of Michigan's Mobility Motoring Division to introduce the ``Ford Michigan Mobility Resource Guide.'' On April 12, 2007, the 14-page guide for disabled drivers will debut at the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America's Open House and subsequently be available at Ford auto dealerships statewide. Madam Speaker, this guide is key to helping the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America continue its noble mission to ensure all paralyzed veterans are empowered to lead healthy and fulfilling lives. Today, in honor of its legendary dedication to our disabled veterans and its tireless efforts to assist individuals with spinal cord injuries, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America for its unwavering commitment to our veterans, our community and our country.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge Ms. Patricia ``Pattie'' Coughlan upon her receipt of the Wayne 11th Congressional District Republican Committee's 2007 Lifetime Achievement Award. Throughout her career, Ms. Coughlan has dedicated herself to bettering our community. As an active member of the Suburban Republican Women's Club since 1985, she has assisted in the election of qualified and capable leaders--with perhaps one notable Congressional exception currently serving--to public office at the local, county, state, and federal levels. She is credited with the creation of the redoubtable and renowned Suburban Republican Women's Club newsletter, for which she is currently the Editor-in-Chief. Ms. Coughlan has also served in various senior leadership positions of the Club, in which she has promoted the ideas and principles of fiscal responsibility, equal opportunity, and responsive governance. Through her devotion to Republican principles, Patti continues to ennoble and enlighten our world. Madam Speaker, Ms. Coughlan's legendary dedication to the founding principles of our great democracy and her tireless efforts to perpetuate America's revolutionary experiment in human freedom are an inspiration to all. Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Ms. Patricia ``Pattie'' Coughlan upon her receipt of the 2007 Lifetime Achievement Award and in recognizing her selfless service to our community and our country.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge Mrs. Dorothy Gay, upon her retirement from the Highland Lakes Condominiums Board of Directors after thirty-six years of dedicated service. Throughout her life, Dorothy has striven to better our community. Born and raised in Detroit, she wrote stories for the Northeastern High School newspaper and later graduated from Wayne State University with a Bachelors Degree in Political Science. As a secretary in the Veterans Office at Wayne State University, she met Alva Gay, an English professor specializing in Shakespeare and modern novels, who Dorothy married in 1948 for 48 years until his death. Following graduation, in 1947, she joined the Detroit Police Department where she served in the Woman's Division. During her 25-year career, she investigated sex offenses against delinquent, neglected, and abused females, and for her dedication she was promoted to Sergeant, then Lieutenant, and finally Inspector in charge of the Division. Since then, Dorothy has proudly served as a leader in our community. Later, in 1973, she moved to Highland Lakes and joined the Condominiums Board of Directors. In the early 1980s, Dorothy was named to the Northville Township Planning Commission and she is a member of the Board of Directors for Heartline, a Detroit halfway house for female offenders on parole. Dorothy has also been a volunteer peer counselor at the Women's Resource Center at the Schoolcraft College for Women and has served as President, Vice President, Secretary and Editor and Board Liason for the Herald. For her dedication to our community, the 1960s Detroit Free Press named Dorothy ``Woman of the Year.'' Madam Speaker, after 36 tireless years, Dorothy will be retiring from the Highland Lakes Condominiums Board of Directors. In honor of her leadership and unwavering dedication to the citizens of Michigan, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Mrs. Dorothy Gay for years of loyal service to our community and our country.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, I am here today with my colleague Mike Rogers to extend our sincerest gratitude to Corporal Mark Kidd--a son, grandson, brother, Marine and American--for his service to our nation, and to extend our deepest condolences to his family and friends. As a friend of the family it is very difficult for us to try to serve the dual roles that, in many ways, you helped give us on this sorrowful day. Mark, as we all know, grew up cradled in the arms of his loved ones and strengthened here in the cradle of liberty. When he was called to serve he served in the defense of his nation, not by oppressing his fellow human beings in foreign lands, but by bringing emancipation to them so that they, too, could yearn to breathe free. It is in such a way of service to our fellow human beings that we honor not only our nation, but more importantly, we honor the universal spirit of a loving God who created us all. Thus, it is important that we remember, even as we grieve today, how we are all frail ephemeral human beings, groping through this veil of tears toward the infinite eternal perfection of the loving God, who created and awaits us all. It is a daunting calling, then, that we must answer; to strive, suffer and serve on behalf of our fellow human beings. But Mark was not daunted. Mark accepted this challenge and he devotedly, courageously, and honorably strove to help free an entire people. Now he is cradled in the arms of our loving God and, no doubt, having not slumbered through this earthly life he may truly say with joyous rapture; now God be thanked, who has matched us with his hour and caught our youth and wakened us from sleeping. Thank you and may God continue to bless you, Corporal Mark Kidd-- beloved son, grandson, brother, Marine, American.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge Mr. Rhys Lewis upon his receipt of the Wayne 11th Congressional District Republican Committee's 2007 Lifetime Achievement Award. Throughout nearly seven decades, Mr. Lewis has served our nation with distinction. As a United States Marine Corps Sergeant, he defended our liberty in the South Pacific during World War II before returning home and marrying Ruth M. Lewis in 1947. Then, in 1958, Rhys was elected a Republican precinct delegate and, ultimately, a Redford Charter Township Trustee. In addition to his loyal public service, Mr. Lewis has been Chairman of Redford Civil Affairs and of the Wayne 17th Congressional District Republicans. Rhys is a pillar of the Michigan Republican party, who has served on the Michigan GOP State Committee for eight years and in the Redford Republican party as for a decade. As a result of his loyalty to liberty and courage of his convictions, Rhys has enriched the lives of others and established a honorable legacy of courage, leadership and service. Madam Speaker, in recognition of his legendary contributions to the Michigan Republican party and of his lifetime of extraordinary achievements, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Rhys Lewis for his tireless service to our community and our country.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge Dr. Lynn Kleiman Malinoff, the recipient of the 2007 Women of Westland ATHENA Award. Each year, the Women of Westland organization recognizes exemplary women in Wayne-Westland, Michigan, who have succeeded in reaching their full leadership potential. This year, Lynn is recognized for improving the lives of countless women in our community. In addition to being the Special Education Counselor at the Tinkham Center in the Wayne-Westland School District, she serves as a role model to female high school students through the Youth Mentorship Program, a program she initiated seventeen years ago to help children from disadvantaged homes. Lynn also assists women in families affected by alcoholism and volunteers at her Synagogue to mentor and work with adolescents and their parents. For her legendary commitment to bettering our community, Lynn was recognized with the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention Award. The Institute for Museum & Library Services also recognized Lynn's Youth Mentorship Program at the White House. Her efforts have succeeded in promoting educated, strong, and independent families who can also achieve their full potential. Madam Speaker, on February 10, 2007, Lynn's selfless dedication to the women, children, and families of Wayne-Westland will be duly recognized with the Women of Westland's highest commendation, the ATHENA Award. Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding her work and in honoring her tireless service to our community and our country.

Mr. McCOTTER

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

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Granted, I cannot bring you the histrionics and gesticulations because I am not from a big city like New York. I'm just a simple country lawyer from Detroit. But I am reminded of a phrase that Ralph Waldo Emerson used in one of Robert Kennedy's favorite poems. It's called ``Fame.'' And he used the phrase ``Being for Seeming bravely barter.'' And that is what this has become an exercise in. The reason that we are here is not because we want to rush this bill. I think you would be quite pleased if we were in a hurry to leave. I think, Mr. Chairman, that the majority would be very happy with us if we were willing simply to take whatever was offered and move on, as much of what happened during the first grand and glorious 6,000 minutes where if they had the votes, the minority services were not required. The reason that we are here today is so that we can seem to be doing our work. If you pass an appropriation bill, your constituents are going to come back to you and say, Okay, tiger, what was in the appropriation bill? And we will then say, What? Well, I don't really know, but I did my work. It is akin to being on an operating table where the doctor opens you up and knows he has to put something inside of you, and then shoves you off to outpatient therapy saying, Well, don't worry. We will figure that out later and don't think about it because we still haven't decided what is going to go back in you. We are trying to bring transparency to a system that does not have it because it wants to put perception over policy. That is what we are fighting for. It is not our way. It is the American way. We are trying to make sure that we do our work in the sunlight, not in the dark of night, so that America knows we are appropriators, not vampires. As a country lawyer from Detroit, I am reminded that this appropriation process is much like closing the barn door after the horse has left, and when you watch that fine steed leave, you know the rear view is not all that it is cracked up to be. We have learned a painful lesson as a former majority. We did not realize, I think, the historic opportunity we had to lead this Nation to transformational times, but at least we tried to be honest about the process, certainly more honest than the new majority has portrayed themselves to the American people. Mr. Chairman, ``Those who do not learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.'' I sincerely hope so, because you are repeating so many of the mistakes we made, I can hardly get to sleep at night, I am so happy to see it. Except for one thing: The American people deserve better. Give them the process that allows them to weigh their determinations that we make here in a fair, full, and honest manner. Give them the government they need so that you do not become an empty majority as this new minority once was. And I wish to close with this. Prove me wrong. Because as of today, as of tonight, I know two things: My party stalled moving America forward, but right now you have stalled moving America backward. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. McCotter

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I greatly appreciate the compassionate concern of the previous speaker for the well-being of the Grand Old Party. It seems that compassionate conservatism these days is far more contagious than many expected and even I would have hoped. I will also tell you that prolonged exposure to the speeches of Ronald Reagan will quickly cure you of that. I would also like to point out to the gentleman, through the Chair, that he points out the rich Republican lobbyists that this town is so awash in. Well, I have good news for him and bad news for the rich Republican lobbyists that are more highly paid these days than the Democrats, as they are now in the majority, which is why you will see so many foreign cars driving around with Kerry-Edwards bumper stickers on them in our Nation's Capital, if not in the Motor City where the UAW might find them. I was told that we are antilabor. As the grandson and son of union members, whose voting record was better on CAFTA than 13 Members of the new majority, I take umbrage at that statement. As the son of schoolteachers, who has a good voting record on education matters, I take umbrage at that. And in terms of voting to send our troops to war and then not voting to fund our veterans, I would point out that in the new majority there are those who voted to send our troops to war and then voted not to fund our soldiers. So let us be careful with our accusations and how we impugn one's motivations. Interestingly, we are not content with the war overseas, and now we see a case where we are going to engage in class warfare over here at home at a very time when we should be united. It is these types of situations that, when I try to explain government and what I do to my wife and I's 10-year-old daughter Amelia, that I spend a lot of time scratching my head, which would explain my balding pate, because I find this place very frustrating. To the gentleman, I know the majority has tried very hard to work on this bill, and it has been called a ``delicate, well-thought-out document.'' If that were the case, how can $1.2 billion be accepted in such a facile fashion at the drop of a hat to simply pacify a minority and to get them to stop addressing this bill? $1.2 million remains a lot of money. And it would be, I would hope, wrong of people to perceive that $1.2 million could either be taken from or put into a bill simply for reasons of convenience and operations of the floor of the United States House of Representatives. But these are the problems that tend to come with governing, as my own party found out. We got to sit in power for 12 years, some of us for far less than that, and we watched and we watched and we watched as the spending and the debt continued to mount and our Nation's taxpayers and families and our party was no longer entrusted by the American people to govern. But I remember at the time I would point out that a lot of those appropriation bills that so many people decried throughout that election were vastly bipartisan exercises in governance, and that there were many votes on this side of the aisle for the excessive spending, and many votes on the other side of the aisle for excessive spending. The rub then came when the majority party at the time, our Republican Party, was accused of spending too much on too many things and for deficit spending. Today we flash forward, and what do we find? We find a situation where we have just recently passed a budget. I didn't vote for it. None of my Republican colleagues voted for it. But it was duly passed. What did that budget do? That budget promised billions in new spending in reserve accounts. Billions in new spending. What else did it promise? What else did it promise? It promised the largest tax increase in American history to pay for it. Now, today, as we go through this appropriation process, we see that some of the promises they are attempting to keep in the new majority. That would be the billions and billions in new spending. Does one not believe that they are going to do everything they can to go through and have the largest tax increase in American history to pay for it, or, in the alternative, they will continue to see the deficit and the debt mount?

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor and remember the life of Jamie Coe, the beloved Detroit area entertainer and musician, who passed away on January 27, 2007. For over five decades, Jamie Coe inspired generations of Americans through music. Born by the name of George Colovas in Highland, Michigan, Jamie Coe's musical abilities were discovered by singer Bobby Darin during a performance at the Cavalcade of Stars show at the Michigan State Fair Coliseum in 1959. Darin named Colovas ``Jamie Coe'' after a song he wrote called ``Jamie Boy,'' and signed him to Addison Records label. Later, Jamie also recorded songs for Big Top and ABC Paramount labels Since then, Jamie Coe led a successful rock and roll music career, during which his remarkable voice drew countless loyal fans. After forming the popular Detroit band ``Jamie Coe and the Gigolos,'' he performed nightly before packed crowds at local Detroit night clubs. While he was best known for his hit song ``The Fool'' and numerous appearances on Dick Clark's television broadcast ``American Bandstand,'' Jamie Coe also donated his time to numerous philanthropic causes. He performed regularly to raise money for charities like multiple sclerosis, leukemia, and for the Livonia Symphony Orchestra. Madam Speaker, although the legendary Jamie Coe passed away on Saturday, January 27, 2007, his memory will live on in the hearts of his loving wife Jamie, four children, two grandchildren, and scores of adoring fans. In honor of his enduring contributions to rock and roll music and to the people of our community, I ask my colleagues to join me in remembering the life of Jamie Coe and his selfless service to our community and our country.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, amidst these tumultuous times, it is often difficult to make sense of the stakes and the situations which confront us. But let us be clear: America in Iraq faces the prospect of a defeat, with consequences not only for this present generation of Americans but for future generations of Americans as well. Unlike Vietnam, the enemy will follow us home; and this is an enemy that is bent upon our destruction and the death not only of ourselves but of everything we hold dear. In similar times, as my colleague Phil English, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, earlier read, it was the moral clarity of individuals like President Roosevelt, who helped guide the greatest generation to their triumph over abject evil. This generation of Americans must retain their moral clarity to understand what needs to be done in the perilous present to get us to a better tomorrow. First, we need to step back and assess the situation in Iraq. The reality in Iraq is that we have one thing left to do as a Nation, and that job has been entrusted to our troops, who have done everything and more that has been asked of them. To date, Iraq is free, Iraq is sovereign, Iraq has a democratically elected government. The people of Iraq within the government are fighting side by side with United States forces to kill and capture al Qaeda and other terrorists and insurgents. And today we find ourselves struggling to attain the last goal before our troops accomplish the mission, and that is to give the new democracy a chance to survive in our absence. I say a chance to survive in our absence, because no free people, including ourselves, can ever be guaranteed that their liberty will last in perpetuity. Did not Benjamin Franklin tell us this when he said to his fellow patriots at the founding of our Nation, we will give you a republic, if you can keep it. The price of keeping that republic, or of any free nation, is eternal vigilance, to make sure that your rights are not eroded and you are not enslaved. At another time in our Nation's history, when we were sorely tried through the conflagration of war, it was President Lincoln who understood that a war for secession had become a war for the emancipation of an entire race so that our Nation could have a new birth of freedom. What we find in the Middle East today as we struggle to accomplish the last task in this mission is that our war for terror has been transformed into the war for the emancipation of millions of Muslims, so that the Middle East and our world can have a new birth of freedom. If we, as a nation conceived in liberty, who have seen the sorrowful sacrifice of so many of our sons and daughters throughout our history to retain that liberty, determine to turn our backs upon people we have given a cruel sip of freedom to before we abandon them, we must ask ourselves two questions: What do we as a nation believe anymore about ourselves and the inalienable truths upon which we were founded; and what manner of dedication can we portray to the world and to ourselves as to its preservation? And then we must ask ourselves a very cruel question: What other nascent democracies under terrorist attack will the United States abandon? Because that is the question that the enemy wants us to confront in what they are doing in Iraq. If the United States is defeated in Iraq, and make no mistake, with the euphemisms that are bandied about, if we leave we lose, and the terrorists will remind us of this. The gutter snipe, Osama bin Laden, will be more than happy to proclaim it through every Internet site and every broadcast media available to him and his ilk for domestic American consumption. If we leave and are defeated in Iraq, everything that the enemy has done in Iraq will be transferred to Afghanistan. Already, as we found out earlier today, we have seen the hand of the Iranians in putting exploding devices and other material to support the Taliban insurgents against the NATO forces and our own U.S. troops who are part of that coalition. Let us not forget that it was in Afghanistan that al Qaeda, and especially bin Laden and others, learned to kill as they chased the Soviets out through measures that they are now applying in Iraq and Afghanistan. And let us not forget that an emboldened enemy will then, on much more familiar ground where the al Qaeda was housed before the attacks of September 11, it will prove a much more fertile ground for their incipient brand of insurgency, which we will have already been unable to quell in Iraq, which will now devolve into chaos and prove a safe haven for those who wish to kill us. But let us not forget, we have one thing left to do in Iraq. That is why it is so bloody, that is why it is so bitter, and that is why it is so frustrating to the vast majority of Americans. But if we maintain our prudence and perseverance and clarity, we can see this through until the mission is accomplished. We can see that the United States, which is a revolutionary experiment in human freedom, can remember the lesson that Lincoln taught us: When we extend liberty to the enslaved, we ensure liberty for ourselves. President Lincoln understood that liberty is not static. It does not remain in a perpetual stasis where we can enjoy our liberty while others have it denied unto them. If freedom is advancing or eroding in the course of human events, let us rededicate ourselves not only to accomplishing the mission in Iraq and Afghanistan so that our world can experience a new birth of freedom, let us rededicate ourselves to the proposition that we who are born into freedom also bear the responsibility where we can to extend liberty to those who also yearn to breathe free, as do all of God's creatures.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Chairman, first, I wish to begin by commending the work of the chairman and the ranking member for bringing this bill to the floor. Upon my first visit to Iraq in 2003, I was struck by the centralized reconstruction process. I believed it was a mistake, and I came back in November of that year and gave a speech on the floor of the House and I said that I thought that one of the things that we needed to do was to provide the Iraqi people a transactional benefit to undergird the transformational change to democracy. This lesson is equally applicable in Afghanistan, which is why this bill today is so welcomed, because it recognizes that the people of Afghanistan in the provinces, in the local levels are where the reconstruction money must really be targeted. If you think about how the United States evolved into a democracy, we began with the family unit and went to the town halls and went to our county government level and eventually became States and eventually became a strong union. We can expect no more nor no less from the people of other nations who are yearning to breathe free and have been given the chance to seize the opportunity. On a more personal note, having been on my first trip to Afghanistan with my colleagues, we had the opportunity to meet with some female parliamentarians, and I was struck by two things: The first, and I said this to them, was that I admired their courage and that there was a part of me that envied them. I envy them because here in the United States capital we see portraits and we see monuments and we continue to this day to hear testaments to the courage and perseverance of our Nation's founders. And I said that I was so honored to be in the presence of these female parliamentarians for in Afghanistan, as they move towards democracy, one day there will be testaments and monuments and portraits of them hanging on the walls of their own chambers and in the homes of their fellow countrymen. We promised that day not to forget or forsake them. And today, thanks to the leadership of the ranking member and the chairman, we can tell those female parliamentarians that we have not forgotten them and that we stand with them. And, finally, let us not forget when we think about the role of the United States, which was conceived in liberty, those female parliamentarians were once considered property until they were emancipated by the United States of America and the coalition allies.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. My amendment that I've offered is very simple and straightforward. It requests that the Secretary of Defense, in concurrence with the Secretary of State, issue to Congress a review of declassification procedures that are in place to guarantee that materiel does not fall into the hands of terrorists, does not fall into the hands of state sponsors of terrorists, does not fall into the hands of groups hostile to the United States, or any similar reprobates in general. By classification procedures I mean Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service procedures to classify something as excess and also as eligible for sale. We believe this should not engender any opposition. We have worked very well with the majority staff of both the committee in question, and the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to defend the sovereignty and national dignity of our friend and ally, Estonia; condemn Russia's unwarranted intrusions against these free people; and affirm our commitment to America and Estonia's common cause of human freedom. After a long, illegal and unjust Soviet occupation, Estonia now rightly and proudly stands by our side in the ranks of free nations. Nobly and selflessly, Estonia is steadfast in its defense of civilization from our barbaric enemies, and has championed the cause of human freedom throughout our world. Disturbingly, last week, this free people's very national sovereignty was threatened. In what should come as no surprise to Americans, whose own founding generation gained their independence from an imperial power, Estonia relocated an aging statue of a Soviet-era soldier from a central location in Tallinn to the city's Garrison Cemetery. Obstinately refusing to recognize Estonia's patent right to do so, or the obvious irony in the statue's new location, Russia used this routine act of municipal administration by the City of Tallinn to engage in a coordinated attempt to interfere in Estonia's internal affairs. Using state-controlled TV broadcasts into Estonia, the former Soviet Union used its state-controlled television broadcasts to spew propaganda into Estonia. This provocative Russian propaganda falsely claimed Estonia's relocation of the insulting Soviet statue constituted an international crisis. Russia did so to agitate and, thereby, incite the vandalism and violence which occurred in Tallinn from April 26 through 29. Prior to these outbreaks of violence, Russian embassy officials were observed meeting with the organizers of radical pro-Russia fringe groups; and, while Russian-speaking mobs roamed Tallinn's streets, Estonia's government Web servers came under cyber attack, the cause of which was later traced to IP addresses located in Moscow and owned by the Russian presidential administration. So, too, there is a new report Russia has conveniently discovered a need to repair its rail links entering Estonia and, as a result, is suspending oil shipments to Estonia. Further, Russia continues to flout the Vienna Convention by allowing Russian nationalist extremists to surround and vandalize Estonia's embassy in Moscow. Mr. Speaker, when one weighs this inexcusable incident along with Russia's recent refusal to adhere to the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, its recent arrest of Russian democracy advocates and its refusal to honor past agreements to withdraw its military forces from countries such as Moldova, one is compelled to question a former KGB lieutenant colonel's commitment to democracy; and whether the red bear is awakening from its hibernation to once again feast upon the free peoples of Eastern Europe and the world. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join in a righteous defense of Estonia's sovereignty; a condemnation of Russia's belligerent intrusions into this democratic nation's internal affairs; and affirm, in the tradition of American Presidents from Harry Truman to Ronald Reagan, we will stand united against tyranny with our Estonian brothers and sisters as one free people.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, I am here today with my colleague Mike Rogers to extend our sincerest gratitude to Cpl Mark Kidd--a son, grandson, brother, Marine and American--for his service to our nation, and to extend our deepest condolences to his family and friends. As a friend of the family it is very difficult for us to try to serve the dual roles that, in many ways, you helped give us on this sorrowful day. Mark, as we all know, grew up cradled in the arms of his loved ones and strengthened here in the cradle of liberty. When he was called to serve he served in the defense of his nation, not by oppressing his fellow human beings in foreign lands, but by bringing emancipation to them so that they, too, could yearn to breathe free. It is in such a way of service to our fellow human beings that we honor not only our nation, but more importantly, we honor the universal spirit of a loving God who created us all. Thus, it is important that we remember, even as we grieve today, how we are all frail ephemeral human beings, groping through this veil of tears toward the infinite eternal perfection of the loving God, who created and awaits us all. It is a daunting calling, then, that we must answer; to strive, suffer and serve on behalf of our fellow human beings, But Mark was not daunted, Mark accepted this challenge and he devotedly, courageously, and honorably strove to help free an entire people. Now he is cradled in the arms of our loving God and, no doubt, having not slumbered through this earthly life he may truly say with joyous rapture; now God be thanked, who has matched us with his hour and caught our youth and wakened us from sleeping. Thank you and may God continue to bless you, Cpl Mark Kidd--beloved son, grandson, brother, Marine, American.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Very quickly. Through the Chairman, I would like to remind my friends that all spending bills originate in the House, not in the executive branch of Congress; and that a lot of those appropriation bills looked certainly bipartisan at the time. What we have here in front of us is a clear choice, a choice to move America forward, as we have tried to do, or a choice to move America in a new direction, backwards. We are going back to the 1970s. As a child of the 1970s in the Carter administration, I remember how we gutted defense, I remember how our Nation had no intelligence worth anything. And I look back to the Clinton era and I see how the budget deficit that we now have accumulated in a time of war was necessitated by the reduction in our military, the gutting of our intelligence network, the inability to defend America's basic needs. The rush to free trade, which was signed by the Clinton administration, and now the bill came home to roost on the watch of George Bush and the American people on September 11, 2001. It is a history lesson that I hope was not lost upon the America people. Finally, to quote Lewis Carroll, as one of his admirers, ``Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.'' It is time for America to be wide awake to the choice in front of them, and let us come back and move America forward.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Chairman, in addressing my issues with this budget, I prepared some elaborate charts. I know that you are pretty worn out of charts by now, but I think these will try to encapsulate some of the problems that I believe my party and myself in particular have with this budget. Some of the problems I think have to be dealt with right off the top. We have a budget that promises to balance by 2012. It does so with many promises for future spending, and it promises to hit American taxpayers with the largest tax increase in American history. Now, we are told not to be concerned about that. As someone with young children who would like to be out of the poorhouse when I retire, I worry about that greatly. I worry about that greatly, the economic opportunities that they will have in the future. So when I see that it is being defended, the largest tax increase in human history is being defended because there are promises contained within the budget that, no, we do not mean this, we will only raise certain of your taxes, that still provides me very cold comfort indeed. When I hear there are promises for billions upon billions in future spending in things called reserve funds, which means there is no money in it, it constitutes an IOU account, which to its name you have signed the American taxpayer, I also take very cold comfort in that. When I hear that we talk about trying to find tax gap money to pay for new spending, I am reminded of the fact that tax gap funding is the difference between taxes levied and taxes collected. In short, tax gap money has to go for deficit reduction or debt reduction, because you are going to collect money for which services have already been purchased. If you allow new spending based upon that money, you will continue to perpetuate a deficit. Now, I have come to this also as a father with young children and as a member of Generation X. I know I don't look it, because I am bald, but I am far younger than my service here has rendered me to look. In the final analysis, there is no true entitlement reform here. My generation is the one that thinks it is never going to see Social Security, that the babyboomers will break the social safety net. We are concerned about Medicare, we are concerned about Medicaid, and yet we are told that we will deal with that later. We are told by the Democratic majority that, when they were in the minority, somehow we impaired their ability to think and devise plans to save the social safety net of the United States, and let us wait. I tell you, I am not getting any younger, and I prefer not to wait. Now, one of my particular concerns I have to address. I have much respect for the Blue Dogs in the Democratic Party. My father was a Blue Dog Democrat. He wound up being a Reagan Democrat, which I think is pretty good. The Blue Dog Democrats looked like this before in the past when they were in the minority, trying to show that they were fiscally conservative. Now, I don't know that I would let this dog watch my wallet, but I wouldn't think he would bite me. So I might take a chance on him or not. But today's budget, for the Blue Dogs who support it, I want you to see what America is going to think of you. There you are. There you are, with a fine new hairdo. There are you are with silk and threads, purchased with the largest tax increase in American history. Now, that dog might not bite you, but I certainly wouldn't trust it to guard my wallet either.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, on March 14, 2007, I would have voted ``yea'' on Rollcall No. 153, the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2007 (H.R. 985).

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Madam Speaker, President Lincoln warned, ``A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. It will become all one thing or all the other.'' Today, our House is divided; tomorrow, it will become all one thing or all the other. What are the possibilities? In our divided House, one side believes we must win in Iraq to avoid a catastrophe; another side assumes we can lose in Iraq without consequence. One side believes we must support our troops in harm's way and continue their funding; another side claims we can support our troops in harm's way and cut their funding. One side assumes we must defeat al Qaeda in Iraq; another side asserts we can retreat from al Qaeda in Iraq. And one side believes the American people voted to change course in Iraq to win; another side feels the American people voted to change course in Iraq to lose. Shortly, we will see how divided we are. One side will vote to support the President's plan to win in Iraq by reinforcing our troops, and then pray to God we are right; one side will vote against the President's plan. And in this question rests the answer to the future of our divided House. My friends, many of you are about to put yourselves in a precarious position, for no one knows what the future holds. While we may feel sure of our decisions in the evanescent present, the unfathomable vagaries of fate have yet to fully play upon the stage of human history. As a result, many supporters of this resolution made an ominous omission while urging its adoption: In denouncing the President's plan, too few of you have openly hoped our troops' new mission would win the day and prove you wrong. Being your colleague, I know you share this hope in your hearts. But your fellow Americans in fields abroad and constituencies at home must now wonder, will you cut our troops funding to prove yourselves right? Sooner than you imagine, this nonbinding resolution will instigate binding legislation to commence a ``slow bleed'' of funding cuts while our troops battle against the enemy. Again, because I serve beside you every day, I know you abhor the thought of American soldiers being harmed by such an abject betrayal of their trust during combat, but it is upon this crucible of conscience you will be judged by all. And when the time comes to confront the consequences of today's expediency, I pray you make the right decision. If, however, you make the wrong decision, you will not only betray our citizen soldiers' trust, you will disastrously unite this House in a callow contentment with our own liberty and a calloused apathy to others' enslavement. Could there be any more dishonorable epitaph for our free Republic's revolutionary experiment in democracy? True, some allege I exaggerate the danger, but they have turned a blind eye to the epitaphs of liberty etched above the ruins of nations once gloried, now dead: the Athenian city-state, the Roman Republic, the Weimar Republic. Thus, even as we today divide in our own House, we remain compelled to unite behind the cause of our free Republic in this dangerous age of globalization, wherein humanity's destiny is daily entwined across the disparate reaches of Earth. Our cause is this: Our world cannot permanently endure half slave and half free. It will become all one thing or all the other, as it has before in the darkest ages of human existence. My friends, at this crossroads of our Republic, we must heed the better angels of our nature. We must unite our divided House behind the self-evident truth that all human beings are endowed by their Creator, with the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We must extend freedom to the Iraqis and, in so doing, enhance the liberty of ourselves and all free peoples and inspire our fellow human beings caged in tyranny's embrace. And emulating our nation's greatest generations, we must let hope to flow from God's heart to our humble hands so we may, where He allows, emancipate humanity into a new birth of freedom for ourselves and generations unborn. Madam Speaker, we must reject this resolution, unite behind our heroic troops and, God willing, win our country and humanity's mortal struggle to be free.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, he was conscientious, committed to peace and momentarily praised. His laurels burned in the bombings. His valorous and vain efforts had but hastened upon his people. Yet, in eulogizing this ``English worthy,'' Sir Winston Churchill, an ardent opponent of the deceased's policy of appeasement, unexpectedly struck a conciliatory chord toward the late Neville Chamberlain: ``It is not given to human beings, happily for them, for otherwise life would be intolerable, to foresee or to predict to any large extent the unfolding course of events. In one phase, men seem to have been right, in another they seem to have been wrong. Then again, a few years later when the perspective of time is lengthened, all stands in a different setting. There is a new proportion. There is another scale of values. History, with its flickering lamp, stumbles along the trail of the past, trying to reconstruct its scenes, to revive its echoes, and kindle with pale gleams the passion of former days. What is the worth of all this? The only guide to a man is his conscience; the only shield to his memory is the rectitude and sincerity of his actions. It is very imprudent to walk through life without this shield, because we are so often mocked by the failure of our hopes and the upsetting our calculations; but with this shield, however the fates may play, we march always in the ranks of honor.'' Mr. Speaker, while not serving in this Chamber during the debates on the resolution authorizing the President of the United States to use martial force to remove Iraq's Baathist regime for numerous just causes, including its refusal to honor its Gulf War cease-fire and United Nations' resolutions, during my time as a temporary custodian of my constituents' office, I have striven to ensure our Nation's victory in the battles for Iraq, Afghanistan, and in the overarching war on terror. In doing so for 3 years, I have four times traveled to Iraq and once to Afghanistan to meet with our troops; visited wounded citizen soldiers, eulogized our fallen, and consoled their grieving families. As a witness to their courage, sacrifice and suffering, I have been morally compelled to support every appropriation for our military and civilian personnel in harm's way, oppose every policy injurious to our country's common cause of victory; advance my own ideas on how to secure our victory, including the introduction of bipartisan, though ultimately unaccepted, legislation to establish concerted congressional oversight over the course of this conflict; and refused to condone a resolution by my Republican peers which failed to meet its duty; and, immediately afterwards, introduced a resolution of my own in order to fulfill my duty to our soldiers, my constituents, and our country. As a staunch supporter of our Nation's mission in Iraq, Afghanistan, and throughout the world, I did so in the belief that it is morally imperative for every sovereign American citizen and their congressional servants to ensure our valiant troops victoriously come home to their loved ones' arms. Were I to do otherwise and lapse in my moral duty, I would not only be violating our troops and my constituents' trust, I would be violating the dictates of my conscience. It is equally true, of course, how within this House other Members' dictates of conscience have led them to a decidedly different, though equally constant course of action. To these Members and their fellow citizens who have done so to date, I share the sentiments Sir Winston held for Neville Chamberlain: You are ``An American Worthy,'' who ``however the fates may play, will ``march always in the ranks of honor.'' Yet, because the resolution thrust before us is a craven exposition of political expediency in a time of national crisis, today many may stray from the ranks of honor. This resolution is ``nonbinding,'' which means the resolution has no force of law to compel future legislative acts in compliance with its dictates. In sum, then, this resolution legally changes nothing. Americans' money will still unabatedly facilitate our troops' continued deployment into harm's way, despite the United States Congress collectively condemning the President's announced troop reinforcement plan. This impotent resolution is injurious in the eyes of its opponents because it will undermine the morale of our troops, their families, and our fellow citizens even as it heartens and emboldens our enemies; and this impotent resolution is injurious because it will not stop what many of its supporters purport will be a loss of life in a lost cause. By neither stopping the war nor speeding our victory and by calculatedly doing nothing in this time of national crisis, this resolution is immoral. This immorality is manifest in how the resolution guilefully attempts to insinuate the United States Congress can simultaneously support our troops and oppose their mission. During a time of war, if an act is not i our national interest, such as the President's plan is deemed to be in this resolution, the act is injurious to the national interest. At best, the act will expend resources, most tragically claim lives without furthering the cause of victory. Better than anyone, our troops understand this. Therefore, this Congress does not support our troops when it proclaims they are risking their lives in a doomed mission injurious to America. Yet, if Congress persists in this insanity, the Members must meet their responsibility to enumerate the reasons they disapprove of the President's plan and, in point of fact, the mission upon which our troops have already embarked. But this resolution does not provide any rationale for its conclusion. Thus, rather than deserving our collective concurrence, this resolution deserves our universal condemnation. To this, some supporters will object and allege two defenses for this resolution's fatal omission. Do not these supporters' floor remarks provide the rationales sufficient to sustain this resolution? No. If floor remarks alone are sufficient to sustain the resolution's conclusions, then floor remarks alone would be sufficient to derogate the President's plan and, ergo, vitiate any necessity for a written resolution. Conversely, if it is imperative for the plan's detractors to express their opposition in a written resolution, it is also imperative to express their reasons in writing. Alas, such logic pales before some Members' impulsive muse of the moment. Let us, then, move to some of the resolution's supporters' second, far more distressing defense: ``A vote of disapproval on the President's plan will set the stage for additional Iraq legislation which will be coming to the House floor.'' As no one who participated in the crafting of this covert legislative agenda has deigned to inform the American people as to its aims, one wonders if it will cut off funding for our troops in harm's way or cut off critical reconstruction funding in the supplemental appropriations bill, thus toppling an unheralded but essential pillar of the President's new victory strategy and proving the perspicacity of the present resolution. While we wonder and worry, according to newspaper reports there is a strategy to make this rumored legislative plan palatable to the public. This strategy's tactics, which its instigators are more than happy to relate to the media, are reputed to include a coordinated multimillion-dollar TV campaign by leftist special-interest pressure groups. No doubt somewhere beyond this ephemeral stream of time there lurks a jealous Clement Vallandigham. But, in fairness, let us disdain a priori speculation, and instead examine a previous resolution to glean the potentialities of the present resolution's supporters' secret legislative plan. The following passages are excerpted from a previous resolution which, albeit more forthrightly, also opposes the Commander in Chief's decisions: ``Resolved, That this convention does explicitly declare, as the sense of the American people, that after 4 years of failure . . . by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretense of a military necessity of war-power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired, justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for cessation of hostilities . . . to the end that, at the earliest practicable moment, peace be restored.'' This previous resolution too expresses its support for our troops in harm's way: ``Resolved, That the sympathy of the Democratic Party is heartily and earnestly extended to the soldiery of our Army and sailors of our Navy who are and have been in the field and on the sea under the flag of our country, and in the events of its attaining power, they will receive all the care, protection, and regard that brave soldiers and sailors of the Republic have so nobly earned.'' This previous resolution is the Democratic Party platform of 1864. If the past is prologue, let us be firm in a fair request: If the resolution's supporters possess a victory strategy, or otherwise, for Iraq, these public servants must immediately reveal it to the sovereign citizens of the United States. If these stealth strategists refuse, they will incur the American people's inference this legislative plan assumes and will hasten our Nation's defeat in Iraq. How else could one explain these individuals' already having a legislative plan and an accompanying media plan premised upon our troop reinforcement failure, and doing so regardless of potential American victories on the ground or the advice of our military commanders? Perhaps while they demur from revealing it, these anonymous commander in chiefs will dubiously coin their legislative plan an ``exit strategy.'' It is an irrelevant distinction. Right now the enemy is actively seeking to murder more American and Iraqi soldiers and civilians. So right now and for the immediate future, an exit from Iraq is a defeat in Iraq. Whatever one pretends to the contrary, one will never convince our enemies otherwise. Yes, it is all too human to wish the world were different; all too human to rationalize away one's misguided actions. Being composed of frail, fallible human beings, even great assemblies such as this have succumbed to the temptation. We must not. Writing well before Churchill's magnanimous eulogy of Chamberlain and, to the contrary, warning the British people's representatives how history was pitiless, George Dangerfield coldly assessed his national leaders' mismanagement of state affairs during the pre-Great War years of 1910 to 1914: ``Along that row of distinguished and original faces there would pass from time to time, as lightly as a shadow upon the waters, an alarming, an alien spirit, a spirit dangerous and indefinite, the Spirit of Whimsy . . . In the hush of crisis, in the tumult of abuse, or when the stuffy air of the Commons seemed almost to glitter with the shining, salt ripples of sarcasm, there it played, airy, remote, and irresponsible.'' Is an inchoate angst over history's final verdict the reason some supporters of this resolution have taken to this floor, though not in this resolution itself, and verbally professed three key defenses of their decision? One defense is they were misled into supporting an Iraqi regime change because of the false claim it did or might possess weapons of mass destruction. Mercifully, let us stipulate these elected officials performed their due diligence on the matter and, especially for our Democratic colleagues so situated, they did not overly trust the some many of them had accused of stealing a Presidential election. Again, there were numerous justifiable reasons for authorizing the President of the United States to militarily execute a regime change in Iraq. As those reasons are written in that resolution, I will not dwell upon them, for they do not constitute the crux of the matter, which is this: the war aim of regime change was a success. It is the post-war failure of Iraqi reconstruction breeding our present perils. Thus even if a Member of Congress can be excused for authorizing force on the basis of being ``misled,'' the Member of Congress cannot be excused for failing to demand adequate post-war reconstruction planning, nor for a 3-year failure to demand constructive changes to an inadequate post-war reconstruction plan. Dovetailing with this defense, some of the resolution's supporters now claim their initial ardor for the regime change was a mistake because this administration has botched Iraqi reconstruction beyond salvaging and the fledgling democracy is now in a state of civil war. This argument has the merit of being partially correct, for despite the hard-learned lessons of our Nation's former successes in doing so, this administration utterly failed to comprehend and implement the fundamental principles of reconstructing a defeated, belligerent nation. Importantly, this does not preclude reconstructing Iraq now. While rife with sectarian violence, much of it instigated and perpetuated from external elements, Iraq is not in a civil war. Relative calm exists in most of the beleaguered nation's provinces, and if one dares to look, there are the agonizingly slow but significant signs of incremental progress in the establishment of order. This progression will be expedited by the administration's new plan, which finally incorporates the two fundamental principles of Iraqi or any reconstruction plan, one, a liberal democratic society evolves upward from its traditional roots of order, not from a centralized bureaucratic government downward; and, two, a nation's transformational evolution into a liberal democracy must contemporaneously provide transactional benefits to its citizens. These fundamental principles will be implemented through critical initiatives, such as provincial reconstruction teams, an accord on oil revenue allocations, and a national reconciliation process, amongst others. But to earn the support of terrorized Iraqis, security must first be established so they may commence securing the blessings of liberty. This is why the troop reinforcement is required and why the twin pillars of troop reinforcement and grass-roots reconstruction can achieve a joint American and Iraqi victory over the enemies of liberty. The ineluctable fact of our victory is it must be won with the help of Iraqis, which is disconcerting to many of this resolution's supporters who believe the Iraqis are unwilling to fight for their freedom and are incapable of perpetuating once it is secured. This argument often intersects with the charge our mission in Iraq has been untenably shifted from effectuating a regime change to erecting a model democracy; and for the above reasons, they think this is impossible. This deplorable argument is antithetical to the self-evident truths written into our own Declaration of Independence, though, sadly, it is not without precedent. Once more, let us reference another resolution, this one opposing a military mission creeping toward a decidedly different goal: ``Resolved: that the emancipation proclamation of the President of the United States is as unwarranted in military as in civil law; a gigantic usurpation, at once converting the war, professedly commenced by the administration for the vindication of the authority of the Constitution, into a crusade for the sudden, unconditional and violent liberation of 3 million Negro slaves; a result which would not only be a total subversion of the Federal Union, but a revolution in the social organization of the Southern States, the immediate and remote, the present and far-reaching consequences of which to both races cannot be contemplated without the most dismal foreboding of horror and dismay. The proclamation invites servile insurrection as an element in this emancipation crusade, a means of warfare, th inhumanity and diabolism of which are without example in civilized warfare, and which we denounce, and which the civilized world will denounce as an uneffaceable disgrace to the American people.'' So much for the prognostications of the ``Peace Democrat'' controlled Illinois legislature's 1863 resolution. Thankfully, by the grace of God and the sanguine sacrifice of the American people, it was this Illinois legislature, not our African American brothers and sisters and our Nation's great emancipator, who are to be denounced by the civilized world for all eternity. What of our legislative body? Now resurrects the specter of our own judgment, which hovers above and shadows us as we seek to ensure we are not forever weighed in the balance and found wonting. It is as it should be, as it must be, for notwithstanding its nonbinding nature, even after this resolution's disposition, our duty demands we make moral decisions affecting our Nation's victory or defeat, and our fellow citizens' lives or deaths. Is this not why, even while bearing malice towards none of them, in defending his own war plan, our own maligned President warned his opponents history is a harsh mistress: ``Is it doubted, then, that the plan I propose, if adopted, would shorten the war and thus lessen its expenditure of money and of blood? Is it doubted that it would restore the national authority and national prosperity and perpetuate both indefinitely? Is it doubted that we here, Congress and Executive, can secure its adoption? Will not the good people respond to a united and earnest appeal from us? Can we, can they, by any other means, so certainly or so speedily, assure these vital objects? We can succeed only by concert. It is not `Can any of us imagine better?' but `Can we all do better?' Objection whatsoever is possible. Still the question recurs `Can we do better?' The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves and then we shall save our country. ``Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation. We say we are for the Union. The world will not forget that we say this. We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We, even we here, hold the power and bear the responsibility. In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free, honorable alike in what we give and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of Earth. Other means may succeed; this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just, a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless.'' My friends, history harkens your honorable hearts to reconsider supporting this immoral resolution. If one believes all human beings are equally God's children, whether they be free or yearning to breathe free, one cannot, after a cruel sip of hope, condemn 20 million of God's equally beloved children to a saturnalia of slaughter. If one supports our troops, one cannot deride their cause as injurious to our country. If one seeks our victory in the war on terror, one cannot advocate a retreat and defeat in the face of our enemy. My friends, through the fog of war, our fiery trial illumes and creeps ever nearer along the trail. Rather than curse the darkness and dread the echoes of history's verdict, let us acquit ourselves with lasting honor by leading our searching Nation through these trying, transformational times and into a transcendent, triumphal tomorrow. Let us earn the esteem of the latest and later generations of all free people by reaffirming our revolutionary Republic cherishes the self- evident truth that all human beings yearn to breathe free. Let us, in our Nation's finest traditions and truest character, remove the Iraqi people's bonds of oppression and replace them with bonds of brotherhood amongst our free, sovereign, and secure peoples. Let us, in the face of terror, march always in the ranks of honor and courageously and selflessly secure the Iraqi people's blessings of liberty and, in so doing, secure our own blessings of liberty for unnamed generations of American children. Mr. Speaker, fully cognizant of my moral duty to our troops, my constituents, my country, and my Creator, I cannot in good conscience support this resolution, which is injurious to the cause of our Nation's victory and in consequence is patiently immoral. Therefore, I urge this resolution's rejection and pray God graces, guards, and guides the steps of all who bear the burden of our decisions made on behalf of the majestic American people. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to go on record with the reminiscence of late President Ford. As a young person growing up in Michigan, I remember Watergate. It is a very early political memory. And it would have been so easy at the time for that indelible memory to remain with a young person and sour them and make them cynical toward the public process and toward government in general. But I was very lucky because the man who took the place of the disgraced Richard Nixon was a man from Michigan by the name of Gerald Ford. Living in Michigan at the time being a young person, to see someone from my home State filled me with pride and a sense of inspiration that one person could rise above it and help to heal the wounds of a Nation. So in many ways today in paying respect to Gerald Ford, it is not my ability to thank him for his service to our country in general, but to thank him personally for the inspiration that he provided me, to see what one good and decent man could do for his fellow Americans.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor and acknowledge Taiwan's democratic practices and respect for human rights. For 20 years, Taiwan's promotion of liberty, the rule of law, freedom of the press, an independent judiciary, and associative rights have contributed to the creation and continuation of a mature democracy. Through electoral competition which expanded their rights and innovative legislation which improved the lives of the Taiwanese citizenry, over time democratic practices, institutionalized democracy, and fostered the Nation's emancipation from authoritarian rule; and ensured the Nation's allegiance to liberty and justice. Mr. Speaker, over the years, Taiwan has been a staunch ally of the United States and a responsible member of the community of nations. Thus, today, I ask my colleagues to join me in commending the people of Taiwan for establishing a flourishing, multi-party democracy and for their dedication to democratic ideals and human rights.

Mr. McCOTTER

Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Lyle Van Houten, former mayor of Dearborn Heights, MI, and to mourn him upon his passing at age 77. For over seven decades, Lyle dedicated his life to public service and bettering the lives of others. As an integral member of the community, Lyle was first elected to the Dearborn Heights City Council in 1967, where he served until he was elected Mayor in 1986. Upon completion of his mayorship in 1993, he continued to strengthen the Michigan Republican Party, serving as Republican Committee chairman of the 16th and 15th congressional districts. Moreover, during his distinguished career, he was appointed to the Michigan Judges Retirement Board of Directors by past Governor John Engler, and also served as a member of the Dearborn Heights Kiwanis Club and the Divine Child Men's Club, among other community organizations. Throughout his years, Lyle established a legacy of benevolence, compassion, and unwavering commitment to the community. On September 7, 2006, after a 4-year battle with cancer, Lyle passed away. He will be remembered as a confident and patriotic American, who served his country with honor and dedication. To his wife, Mary; his children Julie Panetta and her husband Mark, L. Carter, Jr. and his wife Pamela, John, and Margaret; his grandchildren Ellen, Susan, and Nicolas; his sister Jean Linderman; and to everyone who knew and loved him, he was a noble statesman who will be sorely missed. Mr. Speaker, during his lifetime, Lyle Van Houten enriched the lives of everyone around him. As we bid farewell to this extraordinary individual, I ask my colleagues to join me in mourning his passing and honoring his legendary service to our community and country.