Eleanor Norton

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Lynch, not only for yielding to me, but especially for his hard work on this bill, and I thank our ranking member for his important work on this bill as well. I want to associate myself with your remarks, Mr. Chairman, simply to indicate that this land is already in the possession of the District of Columbia, and yet the subcommittee had to be in pains to make sure that the reversionary clause was in keeping with the last bill, which I also sponsored, and with the changes we have asked for. The District took what was an abandoned man-made island, but in our most valuable Anacostia River, and tried to make something of it when it looked like there were some people who wanted to make a children's theme park. That did not occur, yet we were left with a bill that said this shall be a children's theme park or it reverts. It was up to me to come and change the reversionary clause when the District abandoned the idea. If I may say so, I am pleased the District has abandoned the idea and wants to use Kingman and Heritage Island to revitalize the Anacostia River and to essentially return this plot of land to use as an environmental natural reserve park which will help to restore the ecosystem and provide usable space, in addition, when people want to enjoy the river and nature in a place that is really in the middle of the District of Columbia, a big urban center. The District also wants to build an environmental education center. You can see how well the uses fit the land than even a children's theme park. I am particularly enamored with the remembrance grove. We have not forgotten the three children who were on the plane that went down on 9/11 who had won a contest by the National Geographic Association and who were looking forward to that trip. I am particularly pleased that the city's new plan complements my own work on the Anacostia Watershed Initiative bill which this Congress passed last session. I thank the chairman and the ranking member, and may I thank Mr. Rahall and his ranking member as well for waiving jurisdiction and allowing us to get on with the work of taking Kingman and Heritage Islands back to where they belong.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I rise with great thanks to our chairman and our ranking member, who worked so well together on this really essential bill. Mr. Speaker, we have rescued a lot of private sector agencies, a whole slew of them. But here comes the postal service not asking for a bailout. Understand that we don't even subsidize the postal service, even though it is the only Federal agency mentioned in the Constitution. So it's a Federal agency we must have, mandated by the Constitution. Yet alone among government agencies, if you want to consider an agency that funds itself out of its own revenue a government agency just because it's in the Constitution, alone the Postal Service is required to prefund its retiree health benefits. Not us, mind you. No Federal agency has got to do that. And how does the Postal Service prefund? From postal funds. I don't think you need to read the papers every day to know what has happened to postal funds. These folks have had to put up $10 billion in prefunding in the past couple of years out of postal funds; yet this is a failing business. It's not a failing business because of its policies or practices. The Postal Service has been overtaken by the fax; overtaken by emails. They're not like Wall Street, which went into a deliberate mode of greed. I don't care what kind of genius you are, you're going to have a hard time if you're the postal service, which must exist under our Constitution, to figure out how you're going to stay in business. Yet in the past year alone, look at the kind of hits this institution has taken, not mandated by us: your mail carrier, almost 11,500; rural carriers, 753 gone; mail handlers, 2,938 gone. In the last 10 years, the postal service has lost 175,000 employees. Show me a business that is left standing, having taken those kinds of hits not because it's overspending but for reasons, some of which are beyond its control. Now the chairman, the ranking member, the whole committee is on their case for even further cuts, but the American people are on our case to make sure that their mail keeps being delivered and that their trusted postal worker is always there. We shouldn't ask more from the post office in prefunding retiree benefits at a time when I believe you could find nobody in the United States who is prefunding.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I introduce the United States Commission on an Open Society with Security Act which expresses an idea I began working on when the first signs of the closing of parts of our open society appeared after the Oklahoma City bombing tragedy, well before 9/11. I introduce this bill on the eighth anniversary of 9/11 because this bill grows more urgent as an increasing variety of security measures proliferate throughout the country without any thought about their effect on common freedoms and ordinary access, and without any guidance from the government or elsewhere. The introduction of this bill also precedes my upcoming September 22nd hearing on federal building security, which has gotten so out of control that a tourist passing by a federal building cannot even get in to use the restroom or enjoy the many restaurant facilities located in areas otherwise bereft of such opportunities. The security in federal buildings has too long resided only in the hands of non-security experts who do not take into account actual threats, and as a result, spend lavish amounts on needless security procedures. For example, the Government Accountability Office completed sting operations this year, carrying bomb making materials into 10 high-security federal buildings and assembling them in the bathrooms. This scandal shines a light on the failure to use risk-based assessments in allocations of resources. The bill I introduce today would begin a systematic investigation that takes full account of the importance of maintaining our democratic traditions while responding adequately to the real and substantial threats terrorism poses. To accomplish its difficult mission, the Commission created by this bill would be composed not only of military and security experts, but for the first time, they would be at the same table with experts from such fields as business, architecture, technology, law, city planning, art, engineering, philosophy, history, sociology, and psychology. To date, questions of security most often have been left almost exclusively to security and military experts. They are indispensable participants, but these experts cannot alone resolve all the new and unprecedented issues raised by terrorism in an open society. In order to strike the balance required by our democratic traditions, a diverse group of experts needs to be working together at the same table. For years before our eyes, parts of our open society have gradually been closed down because of terrorism and the fear of terrorism-- whether checkpoints on streets near the Capitol even when there were no alerts, to applications of technology without regard to their effects on privacy. We have also seen heightened controversy, litigation, hearings, legislation and court decisions because of the use of technology that intercepts terrorist communications but also covers communications among Americans. Following the unprecedented terrorist attack on our country on 9/11, Americans expected additional and increased security adequate to protect citizens against this frightening threat. However, in our country, people also expect government to be committed and smart enough to undertake this awesome new responsibility without depriving them of their personal liberty. These years in our history will long be remembered by the rise of terrorism in the world and in this country and the unprecedented challenges they have brought. We must provide ever-higher levels of security for our people and public spaces while maintaining a free and open democratic society. Yet, this is no ordinary war that we expect to be over in a matter of years. The end point could be generations from now. The indeterminate nature of the threat adds to the necessity of putting aside ad hoc approaches to security developed in isolation from the goal of maintaining an open society. When we have faced unprecedented and perplexing issues in the past, we have had the good sense to investigate them deeply and to move to resolve them. Examples include the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission), the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (also known as the Silberman-Robb Commission) and the Kerner Commission that investigated the riotous uprisings that swept American cities in the 1960s and 1970s. The important difference in this bill is that the Commission seeks to act before a crisis-level erosion of basic freedoms takes hold and becomes entrenched. Because global terrorism is likely to be long lasting, we cannot afford to allow the proliferation of security that neither requires nor is subject to advance civilian oversight or analysis of alternatives and repercussions on freedom and commerce. With no vehicles for leadership on issues of security and openness, we have been left to muddle through, using blunt 19th century approaches, such as crude blockades, unsightly barriers around beautiful monuments and other signals that the society is closing down, without appropriate exploration of possible alternatives. The threat of terrorism to an open society is too serious to be left to ad hoc problem-solving. Such approaches are often as inadequate as they are menacing. We can do better, but only if we recognize and then come to grips with the complexities associated with maintaining a society of free and open access in a world characterized by unprecedented terrorism. The place to begin is with a high-level presidential commission of experts in a broad spectrum of disciplines who can help chart the new course that will be required to protect our people and our precious democratic institutions and traditions.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3193 and am pleased today to speak in support of a bill that names the courthouse located in Fort Pierce, Florida, as the Alto Lee Adams, Sr. United States Courthouse. Judge Alto Lee Adams was born in 1899 in Florida and served as a member of the U.S. Navy in World War I. Judge Adams later graduated from the University of Florida Law School in 1921 and began practice in Fort Pierce in 1924. After practicing law in Fort Pierce County for 14 years, Judge Adams was appointed to the Florida State Circuit Court in 1938. After serving as a circuit court judge, Judge Adams served two stints as a member of the Florida Supreme Court. He was an active member of his community, serving as president of the Florida State Elks Association and vice-chair of the State Welfare Board. Because of Judge Adams' exemplary career in public service as both a member of the military and as a Florida Supreme Court justice, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3193, which names the Federal courthouse under construction at 101 South United States Route 1 in Fort Pierce, Florida, as the Alto Lee Adams, Sr. United States Courthouse. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3193.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3193) to designate the United States courthouse under construction at 101 South United States Route 1 in Fort Pierce, Florida, as the ``Alto Lee Adams, Sr., United States Courthouse''.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2121, as amended, authorizes the Administrator of General Services to convey a parcel of real property located at 502 20th Street in Galveston, Texas, to the Galveston Historical Foundation subject to certain requirements, but not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the bill. The bill was introduced by Congressman Paul. The building is the U.S. Custom House and is currently occupied by the historical foundation, which has a long-term lease on the facility. In 1998, the historical foundation signed a cooperative agreement with the General Services Administration to permit the foundation to lease and rehabilitate the building. Despite a dedicated and unanimous commitment to preservation, the building is not well suited for Federal tenants and the needs that we have for modern office space. This bill allows the Galveston Historical Society to purchase the building outright at fair market value as determined by the administrator. The proceeds will be deposited into the Federal building fund. The General Services Administration supports the bill, and I strongly urge its passage as Chair of the Subcommittee. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2121.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2121) to provide for the transfer of certain Federal property to the Galveston Historical Foundation, as amended.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 2053 honors an outstanding American jurist. Judge Albert Armendariz, Sr. had a long and distinguished career of public service and was a true patriot of the United States of America. Judge Armendariz was a native Texan. After he served his country in World War II, he left the U.S. Army and used the GI bill to continue his education. He graduated from the University of Texas at El Paso, then the University of Southern California Law School where he was the only Mexican American in attendance. After graduating from USC law school in 1950, Judge Armendariz returned to El Paso, Texas. Early in his career, Judge Armendariz tackled discrimination head on while serving on the El Paso Civil Service Commission and pushing the agency to end discrimination against Latino applicants for civil service positions. Judge Armendariz also served as an immigration judge within the U.S. Department of Justice. He was the first Latino judge to serve as a justice on the Eighth Judicial District Court of Appeals for the State of Texas. In addition to his service in the government, Judge Armendariz also found time to serve in leadership positions in several influential civic organizations and helped form the influential Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund in 1968. Judge Armendariz had a never-ending passion for service to his community and practiced law until his death at the age of 88 on October 4, 2004. Given his extraordinary service, it is fitting and proper to honor Judge Armendariz by designating the United States Courthouse located at 525 Magoffin Avenue in El Paso, Texas, in his honor. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2053.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2053) to designate the United States courthouse located at 525 Magoffin Avenue in El Paso, Texas, as the ``Albert Armendariz, Sr., United States Courthouse''.

Ms. NORTON

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

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. I have no other speakers. Does the gentleman have any other speakers?

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2498 and am pleased today to speak in support of a bill that names a Federal building located in Illinois as the ``William O. Lipinski Federal Building.'' Representative William Lipinski was a leader on the Public Works and Transportation Committee and later on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee throughout the time of his service in the Congress when he represented the Third and Fifth Congressional District of Illinois. He served as a senior Democrat on the Railroads Subcommittee, the Aviation Subcommittee, and the Highways and Transit Subcommittee. He had a lifelong passion to address transportation and connectivity issues in his district, whether it was providing a local airport with access for financing infrastructure improvements or providing public transit options to areas in his congressional district that lacked access. Representative Lipinski also played a large role in national transportation policy by taking leadership roles in the past two transportation authorization bills that provided funding for local priorities in highways, highway safety, mass transit and surface transportation programs. Representative Lipinski was born in Chicago on December 22, 1937. He attended Loras College in Dubuque, Iowa, and served in the United States Army Reserves from 1961 to 1967. After serving in the Armed Forces, Representative Lipinski served in several different public service capacities in Chicago, Illinois. He was an alderman in Chicago, a city councilman, and later held several different positions within the Democratic Party in Chicago. Congressman Lipinski was eventually elected to Congress in 1982 and served in the 10 succeeding Congresses. Representative Lipinski retired in 2005 and is succeeded by his son, Representative Daniel Lipinski. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2498, which names this building located at 844 North Rush Street in Chicago as the ``William O. Lipinski Federal Building.'' I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2498.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2498) to designate the Federal building located at 844 North Rush Street in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``William O. Lipinski Federal Building''.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. I yield back the remainder of my time and ask that the bill be approved by the House.

Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentleman. I ask the gentleman if he has any further speakers.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 136 authorizes use of the Capitol Grounds for a celebration of Citizenship Day. This event will be sponsored by the National Korean American Service and Education Consortium. The bill is sponsored by Congresswoman Watson and has bipartisan support. The Capitol Hill event will be part of a national program for Korean Americans who will gather in Washington on that day. The date for the event is planned for September 17, 2009. September 17 marks the anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and is commemorated as Constitution Day and Citizenship Day. Citizenship Day was authorized by P.L. 108-447. As is required of all events on the Capitol Grounds, this event will be free and open to the public. I support this resolution and reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. 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. Con. Res. 136.