Tim Murphy

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4176) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 122 West Elwood Avenue in Raeford, North Carolina, as the ``Bobby Marshall Gentry Post Office Building''.

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

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 4176, the bill under consideration.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3740.

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 3740, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3740) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 223 South Main Street in Roxboro, North Carolina, as the ``Oscar Scott Woody Post Office Building''.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Government Reform be permitted to file a supplemental report to accompany H.R. 2432, the Paperwork and Regulatory Improvement Act.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, earlier this afternoon, like so many Americans and citizens of the world, I watched the news with disgust as they announced the beheading of Pennsylvanian Nick Berg, a young man, 26 years old, who was working in Iraq as a civilian. Somehow, Abu Musab Zarqawi and other al Qaeda decided it was time to show us, once again, their version of justice which, to we Americans, is more of what we call murder. Repeatedly, the stations talked about this and then cut back and forth to hearings taking place here on Capitol Hill to review the hearings about the Abu Ghraib prison and the terrible behavior of several soldiers there. I was struck by the idea that while the actions of the soldiers in the prison were reprehensible and that they should face court-martial, I am also wondering where is the outrage about the murder of an American citizen? Where was the outrage also about the four contractors who were killed, their bodies mutilated, drawn and quartered and hung and burned? Where was the outrage about the terrorists living in Iraq and showing us the way that they see the world: innocent citizens who had no trial, because no trial could be held, because they committed no crime. But it continues to give us a flavor of what we are up against when we note how terrorists view Americans and view Western culture and the world. Whether or not we are in Iraq, whether or not we are in Afghanistan, they will continue to perpetrate their war to kill us; not because they want land, not because they are seeking economic gains, but simply because they feel they are on a mission to kill anyone who is Western, who is from America, who is Christian or Jewish, and they will not stop until they have killed us or we have killed them. But let us not forget who Abu Musab Zarqawi is. He is not just someone who appeared on television today. World history tells us that in 1999, Zarqawi planned a terrorist attack for the millennial celebration in Jordan. The Radisson Hotel in Aman and other American, Israeli, and Christian cites were targeted. The plot was discovered before it was carried out, and Zarqawi escaped before he could be indicted. In 2000, Zarqawi went to Afghanistan where he oversaw a terrorist training camp. He also specialized in chemical and biological weapons. In 2001 Zarqawi was sentenced to 15 years for his terrorist plots in Jordan. However, since he escaped before he was arrested, he has not served any of his term. In October 2001, after the Taliban lost control of Afghanistan, Zarqawi fled to Iran with a wounded leg. While he was there, Zarqawi dispatched two Palestinians and a Jordanian who entered Turkey, and then they were supposed to go to Israel to conduct bombing attacks. In February of 2002, the three terrorists who were sent by Zarqawi were caught in Turkey. Then in May of 2002, Zarqawi traveled to Iraq; yes, Iraq. He had his leg amputated and had a prosthetic limb to replace it. From May through July of 2002, Zarqawi spent time recovering in Baghdad and, at the same time, several extremists also came to Baghdad and established a base of operations. In the late summer of 2002, Zarqawi traveled to Lebanon to meet with leaders of Hezbollah, another terrorist group. And then in October of 2002, Lawrence Foley, a United States official with the Agency For International Development was assassinated, and after some arrests were made of the actual shooters in December of 2002, Zarqawi was linked to the plot by providing the murder weapons. In early 2003, Zarqawi returned to the Ansar al-Islam camp in northern Iraq. Other terrorists who have trained in this particular camp have plotted chemical attacks with various toxins in Britain, France, Georgia, and Chechnya. In January 2003, several terrorists were arrested in Britain for planning to put the toxin ricin in the military food supply. These terrorists were linked to Zarqawi. He continues on with his murderous ways. It is important to note that as this history tells us that indeed this terrorist was plotting in Iraq, this terrorist was working in Iraq to train other terrorists. But where is the outrage? Where is the outrage among us? Instead, we talk on and on, snipe back and forth, point fingers, call each side names on both sides of the aisle, trying to score political points instead of trying to achieve peace; looking at polling numbers, and not working on policy. It is time that we lay these things to rest and look at the outrage and look at the ties that bind us and say, this is why we are fighting terrorism. It is to stop the murders, and it is to ask ourselves where is the outrage of their behavior.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, when I years ago worked as a psychologist at one of the hospitals in Pittsburgh, I was examining a newborn baby. As part of examining this baby, I looked to see how this baby responded to sounds and sights. Your average newborn baby when you have a light or something in the baby's eyes will turn toward it. If you hold the baby in front of you and the baby looks you in the eye, you can turn your head and that baby's eyes will turn with you. There was one particular child that I remember holding and looking at. Every time I tried to get the baby's eyes to look at me, this infant would turn away and get distressed. Yet if I held an object or something before the baby, the baby would look. I made a note of that somewhere in my own charts. It was interesting that a few years later when this same child entered my office at age 3, the parents noted that this child did not seem to have emotional reactions to people, did not seem to respond to playing the same way other children do, did not seem to use words the same way. It was almost as if he could neither love nor be loved. This child was an autistic child whom we identified early on as having some of those symptoms. Autism is a biologically based, neurodevelopmental disease that causes severe impairments in their language, in their social interactions, as if there was this wall around them that they can neither love nor be loved. These are not children who are mentally retarded. Although some children may have other developmental delays, there are other children with autism who are very bright and high functioning. These are children who really tear at the hearts of families because they have so many troubles with them. In fact, it is impossible to really describe the tremendous burden that families have in raising an autistic child. They seem unreachable. They cannot interact with their parents. They cannot interact with their siblings in a loving way. The pain these families feel is indescribable. The enormous strain that these special children place on families cannot be quantified with numbers. The emotional chasm between the child and parents and loved ones oftentimes leads to unusually high divorce rates at a whole other level. Sadly, existing treatments are expensive and less than optimally effective. There are behavioral treatments that help some children, but these treatments are far from a cure. I remember when I started practicing, we would learn patterns and strategies to work with autistic children only to find a few years later someone else said, that does not work, it was just another person's theory. But there is hope. Thanks to new medical technology such as the decoding of the human genome, cures are achievable for children born with autism today. New biomedical treatments, such as secretin and immunotherapy, are providing hope that autistic children will not be condemned to live out their lives in emotional isolation. But these treatments can only be developed if biomedical research is funded, if behavioral research is funded, if social research to help the families is funded, if language therapy is funded. Currently, autism research is providing remarkable advances, but there is still a great deal to be done and cures to be found. But for children like those I described, we are far from a cure. We need to learn, to teach, to help these children and help these families be able to speak the language of the heart that every parent would love to have with their child. As I said, we are far from a cure because we are so far, so far from knowing a cause.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, the Iraq Oil-for-Food Program was established in 1996 to ensure adequate food, medicine, and supplies were available for the Iraqi people despite U.N.-imposed sanctions. It was meant to keep food on the table of the oppressed, not money in the hands of the oppressors. We are now finding out the program was filled with corruption and the Iraqi people were not in fact the beneficiaries. The very leader that kept them in utter poverty was using the program to line his own pockets and enrich his friends. This corruption was made possible by U.N.-member countries and senior U.N. officials. Saddam Hussein stole $10 billion; and, in exchange for their help, several members of the U.N. Security Council secretly received billions of barrels of Iraqi crude at cut-rate prices. These nations publicly supported the goals of the Oil-for-Food Program while privately undermining it. For the United Nations to allow this to go on for 7 years is unconscionable. The U.N. was responsible for overseeing a program designed to provide aid to Iraqi citizens; and, instead, on the U.N.'s watch, the program strengthened the Hussein regime. Now some are calling for increased reliance on the United Nations to determine our foreign policy? I do not think so.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller). Today we will vote on permanently ending what is perhaps one of the most unfair taxes in the U.S. Tax Code: the tax on marriage. The marriage penalty rose from a 1960s change in tax law to relieve what was perceived as an unfair burden on single taxpayers. At that time, a special deduction was also created to relieve the effects of the marriage penalty. However, during the 1986 Tax Act when Congress reduced all tax rates, a special allowance was repealed for single filers; but the marriage penalty has remained and has existed ever since, with only temporary respite. Today we must end it, permanently. Paying more in income taxes because one is married makes as much sense as paying more for a loaf of bread simply because they chose to be someone's wife or husband. The Tax Code should not discriminate between people who are single and people who are married. When couples say ``I do,'' I do not think they were referring to the IRS. Half of all marriages in this Nation end in divorce, and less than half of all children spend their childhood years in a two-parent family. We need to be supportive of families in America, not punish them. We must ensure the Tax Code treats single and dual earners equally. It is simply wrong for anyone to pay more in taxes simply because they exchange marriage vows. I urge my colleagues to end this unfair taxation.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, April is Child Abuse Prevention Month. It is an important time to focus on how we can deal with this painful and preventable scourge on America's children. It is estimated that a staggering 896,000 children were neglected or abused in the United States in 2002, approximately 12 out of every 1,000 children. In 2001, there were 1,300 deaths from neglect or abuse, but some estimate that half the deaths from neglect go unrecorded. And although cases of abuse have dropped slightly since the 1990s, the number has remained alarmingly steady in recent years. Most times the abuse is from a parent, and there is abuse at all income levels. The effects go far beyond the immediate and obvious impact. There are long-term consequences that include developmental delays, learning disorders, aggressive behavior and depression. Now, these consequences do not just affect the individual, but they effect society as a whole. Survivors are at a greater risk later in life to abuse their own children. State, Federal, and local governments, human service agencies, schools, faith-based groups and health care facilities have a stake in helping to prevent child abuse. These groups can all work together with combined resources to improve protective factors such as parenting skills and attitudes. At the same time by working together they can reduce risk factors such as parent depression, caregiver stress and children's behavior problems. These risk factors are critically important because they can precipitate the rage that leads to abuse. It is well worth noting that this is not just a problem of poverty, but all walks of life. This is not the family in the other part of town. This is our neighbors next door, down the street, or around the corner. This is not someone else's problem. This is all of our problem. Now, there have been positive accomplishments by those who work at the Federal level, notably passage of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, but we cannot solve the problems of child abuse by laws alone. And there is an alarming lack of coordination among the Federal agencies that are already in place to prevent and treat victims of abuse. When one considers the fact that there are 33 offices, agencies and bureaus in the Federal Government that deal with child abuse, added to the fact that there are a staggering 46 separate streams of funding, it is a wonder that anything gets accomplished. The old cliche, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, may well fit here. The Federal Government cannot single-handedly stop child abuse, but it can provide valuable tools to assist those working to save our families and our children. Right now, however, the system is splintered, disjointed and sometimes ineffective. Next month the Committee on Government Reform will hold important hearings on cleaning up the Federal Government's approach to preventing and treating child abuse; but with a steady 900,000 cases per year, despite the millions and millions and millions spent by the Federal, State and local government, it is clear the current approach is failing. We must streamline these agencies and funding streams. We cannot just preach a proactive approach to stopping child abuse. We must also set the example. The most direct way to end child abuse is to stop it before it starts. Prevention and early intervention is the key. Community-based programs have shown positive improvements by utilizing a proactive approach that includes improving parenting skills and attitudes, as well as reducing risk factors such as parental depression, caregiver drug use, caregiver stress, and children's behavior problems. President Bush's fiscal year budget proposal shows a commitment to helping our children by doubling funding for two critical funding programs, money that provides funds to States. It is also imperative that we streamline the Federal system and ensure that money being spent is utilized effectively in programs that work. We owe our children nothing less than the right to feel safe in their own homes with their own parents. It is a duty that is a responsibility and a moral obligation that we all share. We must do our part here in Washington. I call upon all Americans to take an active role, to open their hearts to America's hurting children. I call upon all Members of Congress to recognize that of all the things we do, of all the things we do, stopping the pain, stopping the rage against our innocent children could indeed be the most courageous and noblest task of all.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it may be in order on Thursday, April 22, 2004, for the Speaker to declare a recess, subject to the call of the Chair, for the purpose of receiving in this Chamber former Members of Congress.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns on Wednesday, April 21, 2004, it adjourn to meet at 9 a.m. on Thursday, April 22, 2004, for the purpose of receiving in this Chamber former Members of Congress.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a grateful nation, we honor a man today who lost his life serving our country. Bob Zangas of Level Green, Pennsylvania first went to Iraq as a marine and returned later as a civilian to help rebuild that country. His job was in public affairs, helping Iraqi journalists and media spread good news about their country. But his work transcended this simple description. He was also a teacher. One of his proudest moments was teaching Iraqi women his craft so they could open women's centers around the country. He was fully aware that he was one of the few western men who had the opportunity to interact with Iraqi women as they began to enjoy the freedom of pursuing careers of their own. Bob was moved by his time in Iraq. He described a land that ``is in desperate need of everything, where he felt he, ``was pouring a cup of water out into a dry desert''--but believing some day it would make flowers grow. He lived on a hope that he made a difference and he most certainly did. He believed that our mission in Iraq was right and just. He saw firsthand the gratitude of the Iraqi people, and their gratitude to the Americans who were there to help. Bob Zangas was proud to represent his country and dedicated to helping his fellow man. Americans and Iraqis alike mourn his passing, but celebrate his accomplishments. His wife Brenda described him as, ``a true, patriotic American, humanitarian and Marine and foremost a father and husband.'' His brother described him as an ``American's American'' and talked of his ``supreme sacrifice in selfless service.'' Bob Zangas closed one of his last letters with the challenge to, ``hang on to your dreams.'' That is just what he did--to the very end. It is a dream of compassion, a dream of freedom, and for that the whole world is grateful. Thank you Lt. Col. Bob Zangas. Thanks to you we shall hold on to our dreams.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a grateful Nation, we honor a man today who recently lost his life while serving our country. Bob Zangas of Level Green, Pennsylvania, first went to Iraq as a Marine and later returned as a civilian to help rebuild that country. He described a land that ``is in desperate need of everything,'' where he felt he ``was pouring a cup of water out into a dry desert,'' but believing some day it would make flowers grow. He lived on a hope that he made a difference, and he did. Americans and Iraqis alike mourn his passing, but celebrate his accomplishments. His wife, Brenda, described him as a true patriotic American, humanitarian, and Marine, and, foremost, a father and husband. He closed one of his last letters with a challenge to ``hang on to your dreams,'' and that is just what he did to the very end. It is a dream of compassion. It is a dream of freedom. And for that, the whole world is grateful. Thank you, Lieutenant Colonel Bob Zangas. We shall hold on to our dreams.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, 1 year ago the Iraqi people lived under the rule of a man who massacred and tortured his own people by the hundreds of thousands, who supported terrorists groups, and who was a human weapon of mass destruction. Today 25 million Iraqis have been liberated and an example has been made of Saddam Hussein. Today America is a safer place. Today the world is a safer place because of the actions of our military. Since September 11, thousands of Guard and reservists have been activated to fight the war on terror and 40 percent of the current force in Iraq is composed of these soldiers. And despite what some critics continue to say, Guard and Reserve service is just as honorable as regular military service. They have left their families and their jobs to serve their Nation. They too have seen the horrors of Saddam Hussein's regime and the gratitude of the Iraqi people as they work hand in hand to rebuild their country. Today I thank all who serve. I give a special nod to our guardsmen, for when I see them, I do not see half a soldier, but I see twice a patriot.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my outrage at a recent decision by the California Supreme Court. This decision requires a Catholic charity to cover birth control in its employees' health insurance plans despite the church's position on contraception. This decision infringes on the principles of any faith-based charity choosing to help all the needy and not just those of a similar faith. As a result of this decision, society as a whole suffers. Faith- affiliated charities frequently provide help and hope to the least among us without religious discrimination, but this decision is a step backward. We are left to wonder what effect it will have on the social ministry of these organizations. Some may be forced to choose between adhering to their beliefs and serving those in need. This decision represents an intentional, purposeful intrusion into a religious organization's practice of its religious tenets and sense of mission and it could reach far beyond Catholic charities and affect other faith-based hospitals and charities throughout the country.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and, Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1997, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act introduced by my fellow gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart). When we reflect back, I must acknowledge there was a time in our history when sadly it was not considered a crime for a man to beat his wife, because she was not granted a protective legal status. That is, what we now see as both immoral and illegal at that time was not seen as illegal. Luckily, we now see how grievous and how cruel that error in legal definition was. Similarly, we cannot escape our bleak history when African Americans were not given rights, when Irish immigrants were seen as subhuman, and therefore, acts of violence against them went unpunished. As we recognized the value of human dignity, then we are compelled to do so again today. When we hear about an action of violence against a pregnant woman where the baby inside her is killed, in some States the act would be charged with murder, and in some States he would not. Fortunately, when I was a State senator in Pennsylvania, my State enacted a law that imposed criminal penalties on individuals who intentionally murder unborn children in acts of violence, and 29 other States have seen fit to enact laws protecting unborn children from violence. When a criminal in those States attacks a pregnant woman and kills her unborn child, he has killed two people. No doubt, no question, no room for argument. But the question before us today expands this issue to other States. When a man brutally beats a woman and in that process kills her unborn child, he has committed murder. What if that woman's baby was due the following day, had a nursery decorated and clothes folded neatly and arranged, a mobile swinging above the crib? In 21 States this is not murder; in 29 States it is. It is time we consider the morality of the baby's rights to be protected. We must protect them until they protect themselves, in the womb and during their young years. It is their right, and it is our duty. Think of this. If a man wants to end the pregnancy and the woman does not, and he beats her until the life within her, by whatever definition or stretch one might hold, if that life ends, do we tell the woman her desires mean nothing, her hopes mean nothing, her baby is a sacrifice at the altar of legalese, and she, as the mom, has no rights to her hopes and her dreams and her desires? Do we say to that mom her baby does not exist until someone defines it as so? Tell that to the mother. Tell that to the father. Tell them their baby was nothing. I know that there are those that feel this will infringe on someone's rights, that this is a woman's issue. Well, I speak to my colleagues tonight as a father first and as a legislator second. This is not a woman's issue or a man's issue; this is a child's issue. These are lives we are talking about. I know that there are those who feel that this will infringe upon someone's rights, that this is a woman's issue, but a violent act must be punished, a violent act that is maybe even more heinous when committed against an individual so helpless that it needs the protections of its mother's body. I think back on years when I used to work at McGee Hospital and Mercy Hospital in Pittsburgh, where I would see young babies born a month, 2 months, 3 months premature, perhaps born at 24 weeks, tiny little lives, and sometimes they survived and went on. Now I see some of them have gone on to graduate high school and college and have families of their own, and some did not make it, but I know very well the waves of grief that flowed over the families because they considered those children alive. When a child is killed within the mother, by saying that is a child, by recognizing that as a murder, we are indeed protecting them. We are indeed saying something is right and something is moral, and we are attaching the right legal action upon that and protecting them. Thomas Jefferson once said, ``I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and his justice cannot sleep forever.'' What we face now is a time of bringing to justice those who try and kill those children, and we bring protection to those children too. It is a time when we must do all these things and recognize how within this vast world we can sometimes play with all the definitions we want; but it is still a life, and it is still worthy of our attention.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, as the cold of winter approaches also comes homeowners' concern for rising heating costs. It is important that the Federal Government take some leads in helping to deal with the supply and demand issues. The Federal Government is the largest single user of energy in the world, spending $10 billion per year for its buildings. Despite past efforts, however, energy consumption is still too high, using old, inefficient technology. Only nine agencies since 1929 have reported energy savings in trying to save costs. The Alliance to Save Energy estimates at least 1 billion in taxpayer dollars is still being wasted. Some estimates are higher. For example, military bases can save millions in energy costs by replacing old, failing boilers and heating systems with energy-efficient models. The energy bill that will soon be taken up by the House will take an important step to increase energy efficiency by requiring a 20 percent energy consumption reduction in the next decade. This is a vital provision, one that will save mass amounts of taxpayer money, conserve energy, help save energy costs for our Nation. Let us stop the waste and start conserving for our future.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, earlier today the House voted on H. Res. 400 acknowledging Pope John Paul II's 25th year as the pontiff. I wanted to take a few minutes to reflect on his remarkable life that so many can draw tremendous strength from in a world that often challenges our strength. Some who see him now see this older man, stooped and bowed by age, trembling with his hands, now leaning on his crosier when he can stand for support, and what a different view that is from the young Karol Wojtyla who had such strength and vibrancy of character. And yet despite his age, it is remarkable how he continues to be such an example for all the world. Even though there are so many challenges around, his strength continues to shine through in a changing world. I thought it was worth reflecting on what it is about the Holy Father that has given him his strength that adds particular interest to our resolution today in commemorating such an incredible life. Some have said that to understand this Pope you need to go back to his roots in Poland. He was born on May 18, 1920. From early on in life, suffering was very much a part of him. Poland itself is a nation that has seen itself go from perhaps one of the leaders in medieval days to a country divided up and essentially had so many of its citizens turned into near slaves in this century and the last. Many Polish citizens continue to reflect upon their own history as a source of strength, and indeed it is with the Pope. His father was a devout and upright man, a decorated World War I officer. His mother, apparently of delicate health, would suffer much on her own, and had a young daughter who died before Karol was born. His own mother died when he was eight, and his father when he was a young man. And his brother died, too. He said at one point, ``By the time I was 20, I had already lost all the people I loved, even those who I might have loved, like my older sister, who died 6 years before I was born.'' His suffering gave him incredible meaning in his life. As a young man, he and his father stood in line once with other refugees of World War II, and they were sprayed with machine gun fire from aircraft. He was arrested at age 21, narrowly escaping being sent to Auschwitz. He lay in the basement of his house praying with his arms outstretched in the shape of a cross while Nazi officers went through the house. He was hit by a speeding truck during the war, and probably would have died if caring citizens did not take care of him. It was the problems he had with World War II which gave him strength during the time when the communists took over Poland as well. Again, the suffering continued. The oppression of the Catholic Church, that he saw so much of during World War II, continued as well. And yet he used his position as a bishop and cardinal to give guidance and strength to the people of his region. It was no wonder when he was chosen to hold the position of Holy Father some 25 years ago, the other cardinals and people in a world saw him as a source of strength in a world that was badly needed in a world that was weakened by lack of courage and moral fiber. His struggles have shaped him and given him incredible strength. He has visited some 125 countries around the world, remained active in sports, visited many churches, and as incredible as it may seem, still could draw crowds of hundreds of thousands of youth. A million came to the World Youth Day that he had not too long ago, youth wanting to see him and get a glimpse of this man, the Holy Father whom they see as a great source of strength. He is gentle. Despite his strength, the most incredible thing that stands out is still how he would reach out to those weak, sick, poor, those who were sinners. Some fail and blame their history, some move forward despite their history, and some achieve greatness because of the suffering they have been through. We owe a great deal to this incredible man.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleagues have all heard the statement that says that years from now we will not remember what kind of houses we lived in or what kind of cars we drove, what material possessions we possessed; but we will remember if we made a difference in the life of a child. Some years ago, actually before I decided to run for the State senate, I remember working in a newborn intensive care unit at Mercy Hospital in Pittsburgh. There and at McGee Hospital, part of my job was to see the infants who had been born prematurely. I worked with the families and infants and made sure that we took care of dealing with any risks that they may have had for developmental disabilities, and dealing with the families and dealing with a child who was born at perhaps 27, 26, 25, 24 weeks. It amazed me the miracles that I saw of these babies no bigger than my hand, no bigger than my hand, frail, transparent skin, eyes, in some cases they were so young, barely opened, of how we saw them struggle, but how we saw them breathe. And their hearts beating, you could see beneath their skin. And how, as time went on, we worked with the families and the nurses to help these young babies learn to deal with their world, not stress them too much so that they would grow up. It is amazing to me now, years after I started that career, to be seeing these children graduating from high school and graduating from college; children at that age that otherwise people would see as throwaway babies, throwaway babies; but they are very real. As the history of our Nation is written, each generation that perhaps has been in this Chamber or the former Chamber has had its core issues it has dealt with. Initially there was the forming of our Nation. What did the Constitution mean? There were also issues of the expansion west. There were issues of slavery. There were issues of civil rights, the women's suffrage, the different generations of folks who worked in these Chambers dealt with. I think one of the issues that will define our generation as legislators will be what we did to be meaningful in the life of a child. I look upon this as perhaps there is no more humbling, but prouder, thing to do than to save a child's life. Many of us have also, I am sure, heard the phrase that says, if we get here, if we can make one small difference in the world, one small improvement, the votes we will take on this bill will do that, not just for one child, but for thousands and thousands, perhaps millions of children, who otherwise would have seen life untimely ripped from them, as it was. But for me it is particularly important because I have seen these children live. I have seen children much younger than those we are talking about preventing their deaths thrive. I have talked to them. I have played baseball with them. We have laughed together; we have cried together. And it is important that we understand that it is part of that, that this is not just tissue. It is not just some amorphous cells there floating about; but these are real beings, real beings. I am also struck as being a father. I know a lot of us speaking here tonight are men, and so many times those who are involved in this issue, they talk about, well, perhaps this is a women's rights issue. Let me speak about fatherhood. I do not think there is any more important thing we do as men on this Earth, outside of having a good relationship with our wives, than being fathers. That is the next generation we deal with. I think part of our role as fathers is to make sure we are there to nurture our children, to feed them, to clothe them, to provide for them, to play with them, to help teach them in the ways of life. But that is important, and it is not diminished because we are males. Our love and our compassion and our caring for children, it is very real. But it always has distressed me when sometimes these arguments come out about pro-life or pro-choice or abortion, that somehow, because a person is only a man, he does not get to have input on that. If we were able in this Nation to bring men back in the fold, to work more with children, what a great Nation this would be. No longer having the troubles that so many children have, who have been abandoned by a parent, struggling along, a mom or a dad struggling with single parenthood, trying to make ends meet, but really working with them. How much better children's lives would be, if all men took that responsibility as a father seriously and not just there; but you have to continue to not just create life, but nurture children along the way. It is because of that feeling as fathers that I think we also have an important role in making sure we preserve and work to protect the lives of these children as well. We love them as much, we cry when they are hurt, we shed a tear when they get married or when something sad happens to them. We love them as much, and we have every right to protect those lives. It is part of our responsibility as men and as fathers. And when people say it is not, that is part of something that weakens the American fabric of the family. If you want to measure the strength of society, you can measure that strength by the integrity of the families within that society. If you want to see the weakness of the family, watch how culture after culture has tried to dismantle families, move parents away, split them up, raise them one way or another. It loses the core, loses the core of its being. We have that in America with families as long as we care for them and love them. That is why it is our duty, that is why it is our responsibility to make sure that we are there to protect the lives of these young children. So that years from now when we look back, we can say it did not matter what kind of house we lived in, what kind of car we drove, what we accumulated. We will be able to say with peace in our hearts, we were important in the life of a child.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill under consideration.

Mr. MURPHY

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this resolution which honors J.C. Lewis, Jr, a man truly worthy of our commendation. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.