Frank Pallone

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, it is time President Bush's Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove level with the American people and explain exactly what his role was in the leak of a covert CIA agent. Mr. Speaker, this is serious business. But from the way the White House has been handling it, you would think it is no big deal. Valerie Plame was a covert CIA agent stationed in many hot spots around the world. When someone in the White House decided to leak her name to reporters they were jeopardizing any undercover operations that Plame had worked with in the past. You would think that President Bush would take this issue very seriously, since it was his father who said in a presidential address at the CIA headquarters back in 1999, and I am going to quote that, ``that I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view the most insidious of traitors.'' Now those are some tough words from the first President Bush who knew the CIA well from his days as director of that agency. But when Valerie Plame's name was first leaked, this president, the current President Bush, also had some tough comments for whoever was responsible. In September 2003 he said in response to a question regarding the leak of Plame's name, and again I am quoting, ``if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is, and if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of.'' Well now, Mr. Speaker, it appears that we know who one of those people is. And now the question is, will President Bush hold Karl Rove accountable for his actions? Karl Rove has also repeatedly denied any involvement. When he was first asked if he had any knowledge or involvement in the identification of the CIA agent, Rove simply said no. Then earlier this month, when interviewed by CNN, Rove amended that statement slightly and said, and again I am quoting, ``I will repeat what I said to ABC News when this whole thing broke some number of months ago. I do not know her name and I did not leak her name.'' Well, we now know that he may not have necessarily given the reporter Valerie Plame's name. But he certainly told the reporter that Joseph Wilson's wife was a covert CIA agent. Now how difficult would it be for a reporter to find out the name of Wilson's wife? Not that difficult, obviously. Mr. Speaker, it is troubling that neither Karl Rove nor the Bush administration have leveled with the American people about Rove's real involvement. Shortly after the leak became news, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan went before White House reporters and told the world he talked with Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams and Lewis Libby, and that each of three had assured him that they were not involved. And so now the question is, was Karl Rove withholding information from his colleagues at the White House about his involvement in the Valerie Plame scandal? Or did the White House know, and did they send out erroneous and false statements to the media? It would be nice if the White House would answer these questions, but now the White House refuses to comment on any issue regarding the ongoing investigation. Yesterday reporters tried to ask Scott McClellan whether or not he would stand by the statement he made back in 2003 in which he stated that Karl Rove had told him he was not involved. And McClellan said he could no longer comment on the investigation. How convenient, Mr. Speaker, that McClellan was able to vouch for Rove back in 2003 but is silent today. So today we are left are two possibilities really. 1, the White House has been bending the truth on this very serious issue since the beginning, or 2, Karl Rove has misrepresented his involvement to the White House. Either way, Karl Rove has a lot of explaining to do. And I believe, Mr. Speaker, that President Bush should stand behind his past statement and ask Karl Rove to either defend his actions or resign.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Jim Sinclair, P.E., who is the first Vice President of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association and Executive Director of the New Jersey Policy Research Organization. Dr. Sinclair is a dutiful public servant who has acted as Director of Redevelopment for the City of Trenton, Chairman of the New Jersey Housing Finance Authority, and Deputy Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs, among other notable positions. His sense of civic duty, however, extends beyond the government. As a former Executive Assistant to the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, as a member of the Governor's Brownfield Taskforce, and as founder of the New Jersey Watershed Alliance, Dr. Sinclair has shown that his fervor for business does not come at the expense of a healthy environment. His efforts stand as a guiding example that a coexisting relationship between businesses and the environment can genuinely exist without adversely affecting either entity. Mr. Speaker, I am truly pleased that the New Jersey Business and Industry Association and the New Jersey Policy Research Organization have chosen to elevate Dr. Jim Sinclair to such prestigious positions within their respective organizations. Therefore, I ask my fellow members of Congress to join me today in honoring and recognizing a man who rises up from among his peers and stands firm for the protection of our natural heritage.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, America's veterans are still waiting. It has been a week now since the Department of Veterans Affairs finally admitted that veterans health care funding was short $1 billion. As a result of that shortfall, VA facilities around the country can no longer schedule appointments for new veterans. House Republicans, however, do not seem to be too concerned. Democrats have tried repeatedly over the last week to offer amendments that would provide the VA the $1 billion so veterans can get the services they were promised, but Republicans have shot down every effort to increase funding. Last week, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) tried to offer an amendment to the Labor-HHS bill to eliminate the Republican VA funding shortfall, but the Republican majority refused to allow a vote. Then, yesterday the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) wanted to offer the amendment to the Transportation spending bill, and once again, Republicans refused to allow a vote. Mr. Speaker, this House should not adjourn for the 4th of July recess until we honor our promise to our veterans.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, despite the Bush administration finally admitting that veterans' health care is underfunded by $1 billion, yesterday we learned that the VA's main priority has absolutely nothing to do with veterans. Instead, the number one priority surrounds a picture of VA Secretary Jim Nicholson. On May 27, an under secretary at the VA sent a memo out to all veterans' facilities around the Nation voicing concern that a large number of them did not have the most current picture of Secretary Nicholson hanging in their facilities. In the memo, the under secretary writes, ``We are asking that you give this your highest priority. We will continue to ask for daily updates on the status of the picture until we are assured that all of our facilities have a current picture displayed.'' Are they kidding, Mr. Speaker? At a time when the Department of Veterans Affairs is forcing drastic veterans' cuts, do they really want their officials out at their facilities concentrating on the best place to display a picture of the VA Secretary? Here is the response from an official at one of the VA's facilities, and again I am quoting: ``And here we're trying to figure out where our next patient meal is coming from and what furniture to sell to buy drugs next year.'' Mr. Speaker, while Washington Republicans are willing to support our troops while they are at war, they are unwilling to properly support them when they return from the battlefield as veterans. Last week, the Bush administration finally released budget information that showed veterans' health care is underfunded over the next year by $1 billion. Many of my Democratic colleagues have long suspected this funding shortfall, but the Bush administration did not come clean with the information until just last week. When Congress learned of the shortfall, House Republicans still refused to support an amendment to the Labor-HHS bill last week that would have restored the $1 billion needed for veterans' health care, including the health care of some 86,000 veterans who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, while House Republicans refuse to fund veterans' health care, the Veterans' Administration says its top priority is to make sure veterans' facilities have the most current picture of Secretary Nicholson on the wall. Talk about misguided priorities, Mr. Speaker. Rather than worrying about a picture of Secretary Nicholson, should the VA not be focusing on how it is going to continue to provide promised services to our Nation's veterans? At a time when thousands of soldiers are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan as new veterans, you would think House Republicans would be willing to stand behind their promise to provide necessary health care to these new veterans. Mr. Speaker, it is sad that Washington Republicans are unwilling to give America's veterans the support they deserve. America's veterans should be outraged by the treatment they are now receiving from the Bush administration and the House Republican leadership.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I just want to indicate my strong support for the bill and particularly for the provisions relative to Armenia and the Nagorno Karabakh. Thanks to the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the ranking Democrat, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), and also my friend and co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), for their continued support we now have $67.5 million in the bill for humanitarian assistance to Armenia, which is $12.5 million more than what the President requested; and $5 million in assistance for Nagorno Karabakh, which is $2 million more than last year. I just want to thank all the members of the subcommittee for their continued support. It is very important this House continue to recognize the plight of the victims of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict, and that is why we must support the committee's recommendations. It is also significant that the President requested and the committee has maintained military assistance parity between Armenia and Azerbaijan with $5.7 million allocated to each country. By allocating equal levels of military and security assistance to both nations, the U.S. Government will preserve its credibility as an impartial and leading mediator in the continued and sensitive peace negotiations for the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. Given the ongoing Azerbaijani blockades and threats to renew military aggression against Armenia and Karabakh, it is critically important the administration continue to promote balanced, short- and long-term policies that elevate regional cooperation and reduce the risk of conflict in the South Caucasus region. The members of this subcommittee and the leadership on both sides of the aisle have for a long time played a major role in trying to provide balanced, short- and long-term policies that elevate regional cooperation in the Caucasus, and I thank them once again for the assistance levels that are in this legislation.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. 463. Corporal Jarrod L. Maher 464. Specialist Raymond L. White 465. Sergeant Byron W. Norwood 466. Lance Corporal Justin M. Ellsworth 467. Corporal Kevin J. Dempsey 468. Specialist Jose A. Velez 469. Lance Corporal Benjamin S. Bryan 470. Lance Corporal Justin D. McLeese 471. Lance Corporal Victor R. Lu 472. Captain Sean P. Sims 473. Private First Class Cole W. Larsen 474. Sergeant Catalin D. Dima 475. Corporal Nicholas L. Ziolkowski 476. Corporal Andres H. Perez 477. Corporal Dale A. Burger, Jr. 478. Lance Corporal George J. Payton 479. Private First Class Isaiah R. Hunt 480. Lance Corporal Travis R. Desiato 481. Lance Corporal Bradley L. Parker 482. Lance Corporal Shane E. Kielion 483. Corporal Marc T. Ryan 484. Lance Corporal Jeramy A. Ailes 485. Sergeant Rafael Peralta 486. Lance Corporal James E. Swain 487. Captain Patrick Marc M. Rapicault 488. Lance Corporal Antoine D. Smith 489. Corporal Lance M. Thompson 490. Lance Corporal William L. Miller 491. Private First Class Jose Ricardo Flores-Mejia 492. Specialist Daniel James McConnell 493. Staff Sergeant Marshall H. Caddy 494. First Lieutenant Luke C. Wullenwaber 495. Sergeant Christopher T. Heflin 496. Lance Corporal Louis W. Qualls 497. Lance Corporal Michael Wayne Hanks 498. Lance Corporal Luis A. Figueroa 499. Sergeant Joseph M. Nolan 500. Lance Corporal Michael A. Downey 501. Lance Corporal Dimitrios Gavriel 502. Lance Corporal Phillip G. West 503. Corporal Bradley Thomas Arms 504. Lance Corporal Demarkus D. Brown 505. Specialist David L. Roustum 506. Lance Corporal Joseph T. Welke 507. Sergeant Jack Bryant, Jr. 508. Corporal Joseph J. Heredia 509. Specialist Blain M. Ebert 510. Corporal Michael R. Cohen 511. Sergeant Benjamin C. Edinger 512. Sergeant Nicholas S. Nolte 513. Specialist Sergio R. Diaz Varela 514. Private First Class Ryan J. Cantafio 515. Lance Corporal Jeffery Scott Holmes 516. Corporal Gentian Marku 517. Private Brian K. Grant 518. Private First Class Harrison J. Meyer 519. Lance Corporal Jordan D. Winkler 520. Lance Corporal Bradley M. Faircloth 521. Lance Corporal David B. Houck 522. Corporal Kirk J. Bosselmann 523. Sergeant Michael A. Smith 524. Specialist Jeremy E. Christensen 525. Lance Corporal Joshua E. Lucero 526. Lance Corporal Adam R. Brooks 527. Lance Corporal Charles A. Hanson, Jr. 528. Sergeant Trinidad R. Martinezluis 529. Staff Sergeant Michael B. Shackelford 530. Sergeant Carl W. Lee 531. Private First Class Stephen C. Benish 532. Sergeant Christian P. Engeldrum 533. Private First Class Wilfredo F. Urbina 534. Specialist Daryl A. Davis 535. Specialist Erik W. Hayes 536. Lance Corporal Blake A. Magaoay 537. Sergeant Jose Guereca, Jr. 538. Sergeant Pablo A. Calderon 539. Specialist David M. Fisher 540. Gunnery Sergeant Javier Obleas-Prado Pena 541. Corporal Zachary A. Kolda 542. Corporal Bryan S. Wilson 543. Private First Class George Daniel Harrison 544. Specialist David P. Mahlenbrock 545. Staff Sergeant Henry E. Irizarry 546. Corporal Binh N. Le

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. 1. Major Jay Thomas Aubin 2. Captain Ryan Anthony Beaupre 3. Corporal Brian Matthew Kennedy 4. Staff Sgt. Kendall D. Waters-Bey 5. Second Lieutenant Therrel Shane Childers 6. Lance Corporal Jose Antonio Gutierrez 7. Lieutenant Thomas Mullen Adams 8. Specialist Brandon Scott Tobler 9. Sergeant Nicolas Michael Hodson 10. Lance Corporal Eric James Orlowski 11. Captain Christopher Scott Seifert 12. Second Lieutenant Frederick Eben Pokorney Jr. 13. Sergeant Michael Edward Bitz 14. Lance Corporal Thomas Alan Blair 15. Lance Corporal Brian Rory Buesing 16. Lance Corporal David Keith Fribley 17. Corporal Jose Angel Garibay 18. Corporal Jorge Alonso Gonzalez 19. Staff Sergeant Phillip Andrew Jordan 20. Lance Corporal Patrick Ray Nixon 21. Corporal Randal Kent Rosacker 22. Lance Corporal Thomas Jonathan Slocum 23. Lance Corporal Michael Jason Williams 24. Sergeant George Edward Buggs 25. Specialist Jamaal Rashard Addison 26. Master Sergeant Robert John Dowdy 27. Private Ruben Estrella-Soto 28. Private First Class Howard Johnson II 29. Chief Warrant Officer Johnny Villareal Mata 30. Specialist James Michael Kiehl 31. Private First Class Lori Ann Piestewa 32. Private Brandon Ulysses Sloan 33. Sergeant Donald Ralph Walters 34. Corporal Evan Tyler James 35. Sergeant Bradley Steven Korthaus 36. Specialist Gregory Paul Sanders 37. Hospital Corpsman Third Class Michael Vann Johnson Jr. 38. Private First Class Francisco Abraham Martinez-Flores 39. Staff Sergeant Donald Charles May Jr. 40. Lance Corporal Patrick Terence O'Day 41. Corporal Robert Marcus Rodriguez 42. Major Gregory Lewis Stone 43. Major Kevin Gerard Nave 44. Gunnery Sergeant Joseph Menusa 45. Lance Corporal Jesus Alberto Suarez del Solar 46. Sergeant Roderic Antoine Solomon 47. Sergeant Fernando Padilla-Ramirez 48. Lance Corporal William Wayne White 49. Private First Class Michael Russell Creighton-Weldon 50. Private First Class Diego Fernando Rincon 51. Corporal Michael Edward Curtin 52. Sergeant Eugene Williams 53. Staff Sergeant James Wilford Cawley 54. Sergeant Michael Vernon Lalush 55. Captain Aaron Joseph Contreras 56. Sergeant Brian Daniel McGinnis 57. Specialist Brandon Jacob Rowe 58. Specialist William Andrew Jeffries 59. Sergeant Jacob Lee Butler 60. Lance Corporal Joseph Basil Maglione III 61. Lance Corporal Brian Edward Anderson 62. Private First Class Christian Daniel Gurtner 63. Master Sergeant George Andrew Fernandez 64. Captain James Francis Adamouski 65. Specialist Matthew George Boule 66. Chief Warrant Officer Erik Anders Halvorsen 67. Chief Warrant Officer Scott Jamar 68. Chief Warrant Officer Eric Allen Smith

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I was not expecting to come down here tonight. I did because I was very upset by some of the comments that were made by my Republican colleagues. Many of them said that they were not here tonight to attack the Democrats and the Democratic Party. In reality, that is exactly what they did. And the negative comments that they were making about Democrats and what we stand for were, frankly, very offensive to me, because I have been here as a Member of Congress for 17 years. And I have never seen the Republican Party sink to the depths in terms of their attacks on Democrats and their unwillingness to cooperate with the Democrats and their abuse of power in this institution. One of the things that disturbs me the most is that I have always thought that Republicans were very concerned as a party about spending money and about deficits. I remember when I was first elected to the House of Representatives back in 1988. There were a group of Republicans who used to come down on the floor of the House of Representatives every night during Special Orders, about this time, and would hold up a digital clock and talk about the huge deficits that the Federal Government was pursuing and how it continued to go up and how it was necessary for the Republicans to take the majority back because they would be the only ones that would try to do something about the deficit. Well, you do not hear that anymore from the Republicans, the party that historically, at least in the early days when I was here, seemed to be so much concerned about deficits, has essentially ignored the issue. I hear my Republican colleague saying that it does not matter what the deficit is, it does not matter how much it grows, you know, that it is just some sort of accounting measure and we can spend all we want and we can go into debt and borrow all we want, and it does not make any difference. In fact, what you find now is Democrats coming down on the floor and holding up the same charts and talking about the deficit being at an all-time high and the negative impact it is having on this government. So I say to my Republican colleagues, what happened to the Republican Party that cared about the deficit and was concerned about rampant spending? Because they have become the majority now, they can spend whatever they want and not worry about the impact on the Federal Government over the long term? In fact what we see is the Republican Party abandoning its ideals, abandoning it principles for the sake, essentially, of just being in the majority and in control. We have witnessed, as Democrats, efforts on the part of the Republicans to simply exclude us from almost every aspect of this institution. The gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) who spoke before me suggests that she wanted to get together and work together with the Democrats. How is that possible when Democrats are not allowed to have a hearing in committee, when the committee moves forward without allowing Democrats to have amendments, when bills come to the floor without the opportunity for Democrats to even speak because the amount of time that is allowed on the bill for speaking is very limited or practically eliminated? The fact of the matter is that the Republican majority has no interest in reaching out to Democrats and hearing their views. All they want to do is force legislation down the throats of the Democratic minority and act as if in some way they are reaching out, when in fact they are not. I heard some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the last Special Order go on and on about how the economy is so wonderful, everything is so rosy, more jobs are being created. I do not know what fairy land they live in. When I go back to New Jersey, all I hear about from my constituents is how factories have closed and moved overseas; how jobs have been outsourced to other countries in Europe and Asia; how people are unemployed, and if they have a job, it does not pay as much as it used to; about how pensions and health care benefits have been reduced. And for the Republican to stand up here tonight and talk about their accomplishments and how great the economy is, they are simply blind to the realities. At one time, Republicans used to look out for the little guy. They used to be concerned about what the average American was doing, whether or not they had a job, whether or not they, you know, were making an income in small-town, in rural America. They have forgotten about the little guy. All their emphasis as a Republican majority is not on the average American, but on the well-to-do American, on the millionaire, on the corporate interest. What happened to the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, of Theodore Roosevelt, of Ronald Reagan for that matter? We did not see anything that comes to this floor that looks out for the interest of the average person. What we see are tax cuts that go primarily to millionaires and corporate interests. We see special legislation come up that gives a tax break to someone who happens to be, you know, the CEO of a major firm. Whether it is pension policies or it is health care policies, everything is oriented toward the corporate interest or the interests of the wealthy individuals. You know, when you talk about deficits, deficits of the kind that we see now are basically crippling the American economy. And I used to think that the Republican Party, like the Democratic Party, cared about America first. But that is not the case any more. Sending jobs overseas is not a problem. Outsourcing jobs, setting up free trade agreements that basically allow other countries to take our jobs, take our resources, this is the face now of the Republican Party. And the saddest thing of all, in my opinion, and this is what I think many of my colleagues, why so many of my colleagues on the Democratic side were here tonight talking about the war and putting up the faces of those who had died in the war, is that Republicans, from what I remember, used to be very wary of getting America involved in overseas conflicts. Throughout the 20th century, the Republican Party, in many cases, was what we call isolationist, meaning that they felt very strongly that we should not get involved overseas, we should not get involved in wars overseas if they were not in our national interest. Many Republican Senators and Members of the House of Representatives would come to the floor throughout the 20th century, those in leadership roles, and question whether America should be involved in wars overseas. But we do not see the face of that Republican Party anymore. We just get involved in wars wherever it happens to be. We do not worry about the rationale for the war. We do not worry about the fact that so many people died or are wounded or the amount of resources we spent on the war. My colleagues tonight talked about war in Afghanistan and Iraq as if it was going to go on for a long time and last beyond, who knows, 5, 10, 15, 20 years. What is the cost of that? What is the cost in terms of Americans lives and cost in terms of the resources that we have to spend in Iraq and in other places that could be spent on domestic priorities here, educational needs, health care needs, housing needs here at home as opposed to the billions and billions of dollars that are being spent in Iraq? Do not tell me that we should not think about how we are going to end the Iraq war and how we can end it soon, because every American life that is lost and every dollar that is spent over there could possibly, that dollar could be spent here and that life could be saved. And I would like to know what happened to the Republican Party that used to question our involvement overseas, that used to worry about how much we spent, that used to worry about how many lives would be lost, that suggested that we should only be involved in overseas wars if our national interest was at stake? I do not hear about that Republican Party anymore. War is supposed to be a last resort. Many Republicans used to say that. They do not say that anymore. So I will say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, it is not the Democratic Party that has changed. The Democratic Party is still looking out for the little guy. The Democratic Party is still concerned about our economy and our jobs and putting America first. It is the Republican Party that, in fact, has lost sight of that with the Republican leadership that we see here running the House of Representatives. And I could go on and on. I do not really seek to, because I am not interested in being negative. I would rather be positive. I would like to see the day when we get together and work on issues together. But the only way that that can happen is if the Republican majority and its leadership allows the Democrats to participate, allows the Democrats to provide ideas, allows Democrats to speak, allows Democrats to propose amendments. That is not what we are seeing. It was very interesting tonight because when we had the first Special Order and we began to read the names of those soldiers who had died in Iraq, there were both Democrats and Republicans on the floor. It was my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) who voted for the war but says now that it is time to get out. And I think what is beginning to happen here is that there are some Republicans who are beginning to realize the Democrats are right; that it is time for us to get out of Iraq; that we have to have an exit strategy; that there is too much abuse of power on the part of the Republican majority; that in fact too much of Republican policy is aimed towards helping the millionaire and the big-shot rather than the little guy; that there is too much emphasis on the Republican side in terms of Republican policy about worrying about free trade and whether or not we can get something cheaper done overseas instead of trying to protect a job for Americans here at home. And there are some Republicans who have expressed interest and concern about the deficit and the crippling impact it has on the economy and, in fact, that the economy is not that good. So there is hope here. I would like to end on a positive note because I do believe that there are members of the Republican Party, my colleagues on the other side, that now realize that on many of these policy issues Democrats are right. And, hopefully, we can forge a bipartisan leadership that will address some of these issues in a positive way. But it is only going to begin when my colleagues on the other side realize that they have to give an opportunity for Democrats to speak, that they cannot abuse the power of their majority. And we are not there yet, but hopefully we can be in the next few weeks or the next few months before this session of Congress is over.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I also thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) for allowing us all to be here tonight to share some thoughts about Congressman Peter Rodino. I listened to all the debate and all the comments by my colleagues tonight, and basically everyone I think did a very good job in explaining the significance of Peter Rodino's life. And as I sat here, though, and I was going through some of the obituaries and comments that were made after Congressman Rodino died, I saw a section of one article that was in the Bergen Record which kind of summed up the way I feel about Peter Rodino. And I just wanted to, if I could read, a couple of paragraphs from this article in the Bergen Record on May 17 of this year and then maybe comment a little more on it. It was written by Mike Kelly. It starts out by saying: ``It was personal with Peter Rodino. Yes, he was a Congressman for 40 years. Yes, he shepherded all the major civil rights bills through Congress in the 1960s. Yes, he was responsible for the `under God' line in the Pledge of Allegiance and championing Columbus Day as a national holiday. And, yes, he brought a grandfather steady calm to the Watergate crisis 31 years ago when he headed the House Judiciary Committee that brought Articles of Impeachment against President Richard Nixon. ``But there was more. Or as Paula Franzese, the Seton Hall law professor who eulogized him, put it: `None of us will ever forget Peter Rodino because of the way he made us feel. He made us believe.'' ' And I just wanted to comment a little bit about that personal aspect of Peter Rodino and what it meant to me. Because I think many of us have, of course, talked about all of the great things he accomplished, and they were great; but I really remembered him as someone who cared, someone with a heart, someone who was willing to reach out to, in my case back in 1988, someone who was running for Congress and running for office as a Congressman for the first time. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) knows that the two of us ran in 1988 at the same time, and we both came to Congress at the same time as freshmen, and I knew Congressman Rodino because he was just leaving then. It was his last year in Congress, and it was about to be our first year after he left. I remember, I guess it was about 6 months or so before the election, I, of course, had known about Peter Rodino and watched the impeachment trials at the time. But it was suggested by some of the Italian- Americans who were friends of mine, who lived in the Long Branch area where I grew up but who had previously lived in Newark or in the north ward or in various parts of Essex County, that I give Congressman Rodino a call because he could give me some advice about running for election. I know that Peter Rodino used to spend his summers down in Long Branch. I think he actually lived in West Long Branch, if I am not mistaken. I used to see him from time to time up at the shore at various restaurants or different places around. So I called him up and said, Congressman, I would like to run for Congress and it was a contested race. I was running in a district that leaned Republican at the time, and a lot of people thought I was not going to win. And he gave me advice that first day, made me feel that it was possible to win, gave me ideas about who to call to help me out for advice, for fund-raising, to organize leading up to election day. And for the next 6 months leading up to the campaign which I, of course, won, he was constantly available. He would call me up from time to time and say, well, I understand this is happening and I can give you some advice about what to do. And then within a couple of days after I won, he called me and congratulated me. And I had the chance to come down, the gentleman knows, because I was actually elected in a special election so I actually had a chance to come down and be a Congressman the next day after I was elected. And I saw Congressman Rodino and even in those couple months or so before I was finally sworn in in January when I served a special term, he was constantly giving me advice about how to set up the office, how to go about hiring people, all these little things. I mention that because when I read the Bergen Record today and it said it was personal with Peter Rodino, that was a side of him that I think was so important, how he was willing to help people. He helped his constituents. He helped a freshman Congressman. He helped someone like me who was trying to run. Whenever you talked to his constituents or people who knew Peter Rodino, that is what they would always say. They would always say you could call him up, he would be there for you, you could ask for his advice, you could ask him to do a favor, and he would always be there. I just admired him so much for that because although we all think of ourselves as doing constituent service and helping people and that is why we come down here, here was this very powerful chairman of the committee who had served in Congress for 40 years, who had been exalted, if you will, because of so many of his activities; and yet he was willing to spend the time with me. I cannot yield back without saying another thing. I know that he was a person who cared about everyone regardless of what their racial or ethnic background was. But I have to say that Italian-Americans in New Jersey were very proud of Peter Rodino. He was always involved with all the Italian organizations. And I guess it sort of went back to what some of my colleagues said before which is that as Italian-Americans growing up, people would make bad associations and think that if you are an Italian-American you must be involved in something shady or something of that nature. And because Peter Rodino was such an honest person and was such a clean person and was so above corruption, Italian-Americans really admired him even more so because he stood really for what was best as Italian-Americans, family, service to the community, and really looking to always look out for the little guy. That was his M.O. So I am very proud to be here tonight. I think that my colleagues really summed up in many ways what his life was about and why he was important to all of us on a personal level as well as a national icon.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Chief Troy L. Loining who will assume the position of ``Officer in Charge'' at the United States Coast Guard Station in Annapolis, Maryland on June 17, 2005. Chief Loining enlisted in the United States Coast Guard in 1989 and began serving our great Nation aboard the United States Coast Guard Cutter Northland out of Portsmouth, Virginia. In 1999, serving as an Executive Petty Officer aboard the United States Coast Guard Cutter Adek based out of Sandy Hook, New Jersey, Chief Loining was awarded the George Ban Cleaves Award after he was selected as the ``District One Enlisted Person of the Year.'' Still serving aboard the Adek, Chief Loining was awarded the ``United States Coast Guard 911 Medal,'' for his service on September 11,2001 when all personnel in New York Harbor were immediately called upon for assistance and defense. Under new heightened levels of security, Chief Loining continued his defense of the United States while reassigned to the United States Coast Guard Cutter Line. In 2002, he received his official certification as ``Officer in Charge.'' Mr. Speaker, I am truly pleased that the United States Coast Guard has chosen Chief Troy L. Loining to assume the position of ``Officer in Charge'' in Annapolis, Maryland. Please join me today in honor and recognition of a person who has willingly served and defended his country.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, today the Committee on Homeland Security will hold a hearing on chemical security, something that has been put off for far too long. It has almost been 4 years since the attacks of September 11 showed us just how determined terrorists are to attack us. In that time the House has taken action to deal with nuclear security, cybersecurity, port security, border security and airline security, just to name a few. But we have yet to deal with chemical security, something that Richard Falkenrath, a former Bush administration official working on homeland security, called ``uniquely deadly, pervasive, and susceptible to terrorist attack.'' Imagine a terrorist blowing up a chemical storage facility and releasing a cloud of toxic gas, threatening the lives of millions of Americans. The time to act is now, and that is why I have introduced the Chemical Security Act. I am glad the Committee on Homeland Security has started this process, but it cannot stop there. My own committee, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, which has jurisdiction over chemical security, must now follow suit, because the consequences of inaction are just too great.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to express my disappointment with the American Foreign Service Association, and its decision to withdraw awarding a ``Constructive Dissent'' award to U.S. Armenian Ambasador John Evans. Ambassador Evans was due to receive the Christian A. Heter Award for intellectual courage, initiative, and integrity later this week. The award was a result of courageous statements he made regarding the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. In a series of public statements, Ambassador Evans, who has studied Russian history at Yale and Columbia and Ottoman history at the Kennan Institute, stated, ``I will today call it the Armenian Genocide.'' Mr. Speaker, Ambassador Evans has studied the history of Armenia, and based on his substantial studies of the issue, he was willing to go on the record and define the actions taken against Armenians as genocide. The Armenian Genocide was the systematic extermination--the murder-- of one-and-one-half million Armenian men, women and children. To this day, the Repulic of Turkey refuses to acknowledge the fact that this massive crime against humanity took place on soil under its control, and in the name of Turkish nationalism. Unfortunately, some 90 years later, the U.S. State Department continues to support Turkey's denials despite all evdence to the contrary. It's not likely that the State Department was happy with their Ambassador to Armenia acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. Therefore, Evans retracted his remarks after receiving substantial pressure from the State Department. Well, now the selectton committee at the American Foreign Service Association has decided to withdraw the award with no reason for its actions. I find the timing of the decision peculiar. The sharp turnaround came right before Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived in Washington for a meeting with President Bush. Based on past history, it's clear that the State Department, the Bush Administration, and the powerful pro-Turkish lobby pressured A-F-S-A to withdraw Ambassador Evans' Award. It is simply unacceptable for this administration to continue to penalize the ambassador for his comments. Ambassador Evans did a courageous thing; his statements did not contradict U.S. policy, but rather articulated the same message that this Administration has sent to the public. The only difference in this case is that Ambassador Evans assigned a word to define the actions taken against the Armenians. This was a refreshing break from a pattern on the part of the State Department of using evasive and euphemistic terminology to obscure the full reality of the Armenian Genocide, Ambassador Evans pointed out that, ``No American official has ever denied it,'' and went on to say that, ``I think we, the U.S. government, owe you, our fellow citizens a more frank and honest way of discussing this problem.'' Ambassador Evans was merely recounting the historical record, which has been attested to by over 120 Holocaust and genocide scholars from around the world. By doing this, he earned a prestigious award that was taken from him because of politics and denial. I want to add my voice to all those who, in Ambassador Evans' own words, (and I'm quoting) ``think it is unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games here. I believe in calling things by their name.'' Evans was right, and the American Foreign Services Association was correct in awarding him the Christian A. Heter Award. We should encourage our Ambassadors to speak the truth, and, more boadly, end, once and for all, our complicity in Turkey's campaign of genocide denial. Mr. Speaker, Ambassador Evans has been penalized for telling the truth. The American Foreign Service Association has set a terrible example by retracting Ambassador Evans' award. I guess even in America the Turkish Government is able to stifle debate. [From the California Courier] Rescinding of ``Dissent'' Award Triggers International Uproar (By Harut Sassounian) Last week, in this column, I disclosed the news that the American Foreign Service Association had just reversed itself, taking the unprecedented step of withdrawing the ``Constructive Dissent'' award from John Evans, the U.S. Ambassador to Armenia. This was a shocking development, as this award is given to high-ranking diplomats for their ``intellectual courage, initiative and integrity in the context of constructive dissent [and] for demonstrating the courage to speak out and challenge the system on a subject related to their work.'' Last February, Ambassador Evans had forthrightly and appropriately referred to the Armenian Genocide, as a genocide, to the chagrin of the Turkish government and its supporters in the Bush administration. It was highly ironic that the U.S. Ambassador would lose this award for the very reason that it was given to him in the first place-- ``dissent.'' So much for encouraging honesty and integrity at the State Department. I posted my last week's column on the groong web site in the evening of June 6, a couple of hours after being informed by AFSA that it had just decided to rescind the award. Little did I know then that within a couple of days, my column would trigger a national and international uproar and would be picked up by scores of newspapers and wire services from around the world, such as the Washington Post, the Associated Press, the UPI, Hurriyet, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Turkish Daily News, AzerTag (Azerbaijan), Webindia123 (India), and Armenian newspapers in several countries. Even the spokesman for the State Dept., Sean McCormack, was asked about this controversial issue during his daily press briefing on June 9. Despite attempts AFSA and State Dept. officials to cover up the real reasons for the withdrawal of the award, it has become clear that the award was rescinded after direct pressure was brought to bear on AFSA from the State Dept. When John Limbert, the president of AFSA, was asked by the Washington Post to explain the reason for his group's action, he replied: ``State Department officials would have to explain their concerns.'' The Award Committee is composed of current and former State Department officials. L. Bruce Laingen, who chaired the selection committee, was more forthcoming. He told the Post that ``very serious people from the State Department in particular'' expressed concerns about this award being given to Amb. Evans. Laingen said that the award committee had not focused on the criterion that dissent had to be expressed within the system, until it was reminded of that by the State Department! Once again, as a result of the over-reaction of Turkish officials and their Washington cronies, the issue of the Armenian Genocide was publicized worldwide. All of the above newspapers and wire services, even the Turkish and Azeri ones, reported that the award had been withdrawn from Amb. Evans because of his comments on the Armenian Genocide. The Washington Post wrote that Amb. Evans had characterized ``as genocide the deaths of 1.5 million Armenians in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire in 1915.'' It included in its article lengthy quotations from the statements Amb. Evans had made last February on the Armenian Genocide--the same quotations that I had cited in my last week's column. The Washington Post also wrote: ``the timing of the association's decision appeared curious, given it came just before Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrived in Washington for a meeting with President Bush to bolster strained U.S.-Turkish relations. John W. Limbert, president of the association, said that no one at the organization can remember an award being withdrawn after it had been announced. `It is not something we do easily,' he said.'' Ironically, if the State Department thought that by withdrawing this award it would avoid the awkward situation of honoring the U.S. ambassador to Armenia for acknowledging the Armenian Genocide, at a time when the Turkish Prime Minister was meeting with Pres. Bush, it actually ended up creating a bigger embarrassment, as the national and international media reported AFSA's controversial decision, while the Turkish leader was still in Washington. By withdrawing the ``Dissent'' award, AFSA and the State Department made fools of themselves in front of the whole world. Their unwarranted action not only undermined the credibility of the award, but also the reputations of both AFSA and the U.S. government which acted in this case with intolerance more typical of oppressive third world regimes.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, either the Bush administration refuses to see the reality on the ground in Iraq or they are deceiving the American people as to the continued war in Iraq. During a Memorial Day interview on CNN's Larry King, Vice President Cheney said he believed the insurgency was in its ``last throes.'' Where exactly is the Vice President getting his information? It certainly is not coming from the generals on the ground. According to a report from Knight-Ridder, a growing number of senior American military officers in Iraq have concluded there is no longer a military solution to the insurgency in Iraq, an insurgency that military leaders on the ground say is not running out of recruits. In the news report, Lt. Colonel Frederick Wellman said, ``We can't kill them all. When I kill one I create three.'' That certainly does not sound like we have the insurgency under control, and, as the Vice President suggests, that they are in their ``last throes.'' Things are really getting so bad in Iraq, Mr. Speaker, that we are beginning finally to hear Republican Congressmen step forward and question some of the outrageous claims made by the Bush administration in regard to their policy in Iraq. This past weekend, my Republican friend, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), came forward and said that the Bush administration needs to have a deadline for its war in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) and I have been next-door neighbors in the Cannon House Office Building for years. As visitors to our wing of the fourth floor walk down the hallway, they see the faces of the fallen. Since the beginning of the war, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) has been hanging up the pictures of the brave American soldiers who have died in Iraq. It started right outside his door and spread so quickly that the faces are outside each of the Members' doors of our wing of the Cannon Building. Another one of our Republican colleagues, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), criticized the Bush administration for not leveling with the American people about the real number of Iraqi troops that have been trained to date. On Sunday's ``Meet the Press,'' the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) said, ``We can't come back to America and have our people be convinced that the Iraqi troops are prepared to take over when they are not.'' Weldon went on to say that the administration needs to come to grips with the rising insurgency, again an insurgency that Vice President Cheney refuses to acknowledge. Mr. Speaker, these are the kinds of statements we have heard for the last year from a large group of my Democratic colleagues. We have been calling on House Republican leaders to hold this administration responsible for its faulty intelligence. We have called on the House Republican leadership to hold this administration accountable for the 20-plus billion dollars spent in Iraq. We have called on the House Republican leadership to call the war leaders at the Pentagon up to Capitol Hill to explain their war strategy. And to this date, the House Republican leadership simply refuses to hold the Bush administration responsible for the way it is conducting the war in Iraq. It is refreshing to finally hear several Republican colleagues questioning the actions of this administration. However, it simply is not enough. At a time when the Army and Marines are having a difficult time reaching their recruitment goals for the military of the future, at a time when the Bush administration is painting a far rosier picture of the number of Iraqi troops that have been trained, at a time when the Bush administration refuses to admit that the insurgency in Iraq is getting bigger and more difficult to deal with by the day, the House Republican leadership cannot continue to ignore a growing number of Members of this Chamber, of both parties, who are demanding that the administration level with the American people about the Iraq war.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of Jack Sullivan as State Vice President of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. Jack has served the AOH as its Vice President for the past four years with great distinction. Jack's commitment to community and his love for Irish heritage go back to his youth in Brooklyn where he attended St. Brendan's school. Growing up in the culturally diverse borough of Brooklyn, Jack became involved in politics at an early age to ensure that the voice of the Irish Catholic community was heard. He joined the Ancient Order of Hibernians, Division 35 in Brooklyn in 1984. He went on to serve in a number of capacities in the AOH there as well as with the Knights of Columbus and Irish Northern Aid. After moving to New Jersey, Jack transferred to Division 2, now the Volunteer Pat Torphy Division 2-- Monmouth County, where he has served as President since 1996. Under Jack's leadership the Division and State Board were able to raise money for the Great Hunger Monument in Keansburg. He was also instrumental in obtaining financial assistance and manual labor for a Christian Brothers run school in Harlem, the sisters of Charity in Asbury Park and the Medical Missionaries of Mary. The Division has also been able to donate significant amounts of time and money to the Bloody Sunday Committee, the Pat Finuncane Fund, the Joe Doherty Irish Language School and the Joe Harper Fife and Drum band in county Down. Jack truly embodies the Hibernian ideal of Christian charity. Jack has also made significant strides in the pursuit of peace and justice in the North of Ireland. He has led the annual trip to Ireland for the commemoration of Bloody Sunday and has highlighted the plight that many Catholics continue to face to this day. Mr. Speaker, once again I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Jack for his tireless service to the AOH and the Irish American community. I hope that he continues to remain actively involved in the AOH and in promoting the values of friendship, unity and Christian charity.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of Bill Young as State President of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. Bill has served the AOH as its President for the past four years with great distinction. His service to the community and in particular, the Irish American community, has been a constant theme throughout his life going back to his early days in Bayonne with Tommy Foley and his father's shoe shine box. Growing up as a young Irish Catholic, Bill was instilled with a sense of Christian charity early on at St. Vincent de Paul Grammar School. Those values have guided Bill throughout his career in public service at the Port Authority of NY & NJ, the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development and the United States Coast Guard Reserve. In addition to his significant professional achievements, Bill has been actively involved in numerous community organizations where he has displayed his commitment to the purposes and goals of the AOH--to promote Irish culture and encourage civic participation. Bill has walked in the Annual Bloody Sunday march in Derry the past four years and pressures elected officials to recognize the contributions of Irish Americans ensuring that they fight for peace and justice in the North of Ireland. Under Bill Young's leadership as State President the AOH has seen a 40 percent growth in Divisions, a strong increase in membership, and more accessibility of the State Board through roaming meetings and degree programs. The State Board has been instrumental in fundraising efforts to allow NJ Special Olympians to travel to Ireland for the Special Olympics and for the efforts to build a famine memorial in Keansburg. Mr. Speaker, once again I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Bill for his tireless service to the AOH and the Irish American community. I hope that he continues to remain actively involved in promoting the values of friendship, unity and Christian charity.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of Jere Cole as State Treasurer of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. Jere has served the AOH as its Treasurer for the past two years with great distinction. Jere's dedication to public service was instilled in him at a very young age and he has demonstrated throughout his life a commitment to the Hibernian ideals of friendship, unity and Christian charity. After graduation from high school, Jere enlisted in the United States Air Force serving in Vietnam where he won the Air Force Accommodation medal. Much of Jere's service to the community since then has been with the West Caldwell Volunteer Fire Department where he has served as 1st Assistant Chief. He has served as President of Fireman's Association, State Secretary of the NJ State Exempt Fireman's Association, and has sat on the Board of Managers of the Fireman's Home in Boonton. Jere also served as Secretary-Treasurer of the NJ State Fire Chiefs Association. In addition to his responsibilities with the fire service, Jere has served as the Democratic Chairman of the West Caldwell Democratic committee and has been very active in Essex County democratic politics. Jere has spent a great deal of time in service with the AOH State Board while staying very active in the Irish American community in NJ. He is a member of numerous Irish American cultural and social organizations and has served as General Chairman of the NJ Irish Festival at the PNC Bank Arts Center as well as being an active member of the Newark St. Patrick's Day Parade committee. Mr. Speaker, once again I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Jere for his tireless service to the AOH and the Irish American community. I hope that he continues to remain actively involved in the AOH and in promoting the values of friendship, unity and Christian charity.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of Richard Farricker as State secretary of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. Rich has served the AOH as its secretary for the past 5\1/2\ years with great distinction. Over the years Rich has undertaken a significant number of pursuits while remaining actively engaged in his community. Enlisting in the Army in the first year of the Vietnam war, and serving two tours there immediately following high school, Rich has traveled much of the world. Upon returning to the United States, Rich traveled the country playing in a band before eventually settling in Monmouth County where he raised his family. Rich's dedication to public service was instilled in him at a very young age and he has demonstrated throughout his life a commitment to the Hibernian ideals of friendship, unity and Christian charity. Rich's service to the State board as secretary has seen the introduction of a comprehensive website where the minutes for State board meetings are posted within days. A variety of other measures have been taken to improve communications between the State board and the various divisions during Rich's tenure as secretary. Proud of his Irish heritage, Rich has a deep love for genealogy that has led to membership in the Irish Federation, Irish Northern Aid, and his studying of the Irish language. Mr. Speaker, once again I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Rich for his tireless service to the AOH and the lrish-American community. I hope that he continues to remain actively involved in the AOH and in promoting the values of friendship, unity and Christian charity.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to express my disappointment with the American Foreign Service Association, and its decision to withdraw awarding a ``Constructive Dissent'' award to U.S. Armenian Ambassador John Evans. Ambassador Evans was due to receive the Christian A. Heter Award for intellectual courage, initiative, and integrity later this week. The award was as a result of courageous statements he made regarding the recognition of the Armenian genocide. In a series of public statements, Ambassador Evans, who has studied Russian history at Yale and Columbia and Ottoman history at the Kennan Institute stated, ``I will today call it the Armenian genocide.'' Mr. Speaker, Ambassador Evans has studied history of Armenia, and based on his substantial studies of the issue, he is willing to go on the record and define the actions taken Armenians as genocide. The Armenian genocide was the systematic extermination, the murder, of 1.5 million Armenian men, women and children. To this day, the Republic of Turkey refuses to acknowledge the fact that this massive crime against humanity took place on soil under its control, and in the name of Turkish nationalism. Unfortunately, some 90 years later, the U.S. State Department continues to support Turkey's demands and denials despite all evidence to the contrary. It is not likely that the State Department was happy that their Ambassador to Armenia acknowledged the Armenian genocide. And, therefore, Ambassador Evans retracted his remarks after receiving substantial pressure from the State Department. Well, now the selection committee at the American Foreign Service Association has decided to withdraw the award with no reason for its actions. I find the timing of the decision peculiar. The sharp turnaround came right before Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan arrived in Washington for a meeting with President Bush. Based on past history, it is clear that the State Department, the Bush administration, and the pro-Turkish lobby pressured AFSA to withdraw Ambassador Evans' award. It is simply unacceptable for this administration to continue to penalize the ambassador for his comments. Ambassador Evans did a courageous thing. His statements did not contradict U.S. policy, but rather articulated the same message that this administration has sent to the public. The only difference in this case is that Ambassador Evans assigned a word to define the actions taken against the Armenians. This was a refreshing break, I must add, from a pattern on the part of the State Department of using evasive and euphemistic terminology to obscure the full reality of the Armenian genocide. Ambassador Evans pointed out, and I quote, that no American official has ever denied it, and went on to say, and I quote, I think we, the U.S. Government, owe you, our fellow citizens, a more frank and honest way of discussing this problem. Ambassador Evans was merely recounting the historical record, which has been attested to by over 120 Holocaust and genocide scholars from around the world. By doing this, he earned a prestigious award that was taken from him because of politics and denial. Mr. Speaker, I want to add my voice to all those who, in Ambassador Evans' own words, and again I am quoting, think it is unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games here. I believe in calling things by their name. Evans was right, and the American Foreign Service Association was correct in awarding him the Christian A. Herter Award. We should encourage our Ambassadors to speak the truth, and, more broadly, end, once and for all, our complicity in Turkey's campaign of genocide denial. Mr. Speaker, Ambassador Evans has been penalized for simply telling the truth. The American Foreign Service Association has set a terrible example by retracting Ambassador Evans' award. I guess, even in America, the Turkish Government is able to stifle debate.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise to recognize the longevity of the Richmond Towers in Plainfield, New Jersey. This September, the Housing Authority of Plainfield will celebrate the 30th Anniversary of the Richmond Towers, a 225 unit senior citizen complex developed to serve seniors within the Plainfield area. This building is a testament to the successes of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which funded this project that helped to house thousands of residents in the Plainfield community. Today I feel fortunate to stand here and announce that two agencies, one at the Federal level and one at the state, have not only followed through with their goals, but exceeded them. The Housing Authority has been invaluable to the senior citizens of Plainfield and I am confident that it will continue to be for the next 30 years as well.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, the House Republican leadership pulled the intelligence authorization bill from the floor today because the leadership here is doing the dirty work of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. We all know that Rumsfeld was against the intelligence reforms that the 9/11 Commission suggested, and now he is trying to prevent those reforms from moving forward. The Republican leadership is keeping the intelligence bill from coming to the floor today because Secretary Rumsfeld does not want to give up any intelligence control to new Intelligence Director Negroponte. Let us be clear, Secretary Rumsfeld and the Republican leadership are preventing intelligence reform that could make our Nation safer than it is today. The 9/11 commissioners warned us earlier this week that time is not on our side. It is time the House Republican leadership stops listening to Rumsfeld and starts listening to the 9/11 Commission so we can finally begin to protect our Nation.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize the services of the Ladies Auxiliary of the Aberdeen Township Hose & Chemical Co. No. 1. This organization was formed on May 22, 1930 for the purpose of raising funds in order to purchase fire equipment. Over their 75 years of service, they have provided a completely equipped kitchen for a local firehouse, answered fire calls, and served coffee and sandwiches at lengthy fires, as well as many other unnamed services that have invaluably aided the fire company. The importance of firemen cannot be overstated. We were reminded of that on September 11, 2001. These brave men and women are irreplaceable, and the Ladies. Auxiliary of the Aberdeen Township Hose & Chemical Co. No. 1 has supported them through the years. It is never easy to work in a high risk and high stress job, yet the Auxiliary has helped the men and women of the Fire Company maintain a high morale and continue to protect the Aberdeen community. These women have served the Aberdeen Fire Company admirably for 75 years, and the Ladies Auxiliary stands ready to assist the Fire Company and give it the same unbending support for the next 75 years.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, when is President Bush going to level with the American people about the U.S. economy? This past weekend during his weekly radio address he said the economy is on the right track. The President's statement came one day after disappointing job numbers showed our economy only created 78,000 new jobs in May, the smallest number in almost 2 years. Keep in mind the economy has to create 150,000 each month just to keep pace with more workers entering the workforce. Last month's numbers created only half that number. Mr. Speaker, President Bush has yet to create his first job since coming to office 5 years ago. In fact, the economy has to create an additional 24,000 jobs just to get back to where it was when he took office in 2001. Let us compare President Bush's 5-year jobs record to past Presidents. No other modern day President has presided over an economy where not a single job was created over a 4-year period. The Center for American Progress averaged the number of jobs created by modern Presidents who served 2 years. The Center determined the average number of jobs created by those Presidents through 52 months was 5.9 million jobs. The largest job creation came under the last two Democratic Presidents to serve two terms, President Clinton, who created 11.9 million jobs during his 52 months of his Presidency, followed by President Lyndon Johnson who created 7.6 million jobs. It is hard for me to believe after hearing these numbers President Bush could possibly be satisfied with the fact that his policies have yet to create one single private sector job. It is also hard to believe that congressional Republicans seem satisfied with these abysmal job numbers. You do not hear any of my Republican colleagues questioning the President's economic proposals of the last 4 years. You also do not hear President Bush or congressional Republicans voice any concern over the sharp cut in manufacturing jobs that has taken place on their watch. Since President Bush took office 5 years ago, our economy has lost 2.8 million manufacturing jobs, including 7,000 more in May. Yet neither the President nor congressional Republicans are willing to do anything to strengthen the manufacturing sector. In fact, congressional Republicans have blocked Democratic initiatives to help the manufacturing industry. Instead, they are more interested in passing $36 billion worth of tax incentives for large corporations to ship American jobs overseas. The weakness of the job market is also showing up, Mr. Speaker, in the continued stagnation of workers' earnings. It is almost hard to believe, but wages have actually declined since the end of the recession. Again, according to a report from the Center For American Progress, real average hourly earnings declined to $16 in April of this year. That is 7 cents lower than the earnings mark at the end of the recession in November 2001. This means that over the last 4 years, on average, American workers are not getting paid any more than they were when our economy was actually in a recession. It is no wonder Americans are trying to squeeze every last dollar out of every paycheck. While wages have stalled in my home State of New Jersey, health care, college tuition, child care and gasoline costs have increased an average of $6,000 for a New Jersey family every year. President Bush and congressional Republicans tell the American people that the policies they have implemented over the last 4 years are working. If the President and congressional Republicans believe this economy is on the right track, I shudder to imagine what a wrong-track economy would look like. Mr. Speaker, polls show only 32 percent of the American people think the economy is moving in the right direction. It is clear the Republican way of growing this economy simply is not working. If they would only admit that the economy is a concern, maybe we could begin to fix it collectively. I think it is time for a new economic plan that creates millions of high-paying jobs, penalizes companies that send job overseas, and helps companies confront skyrocketing health care costs. Our economy will not be back on track again until the middle class stops feeling squeezed.

Mr. PALLONE

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to rise in support of the Jones amendment. I think the gentlewoman is right on point here. I know for my base, in this case Fort Monmouth, we have not received a lot of the data, most of the data upon which the Pentagon's recommendations were made. I think that was quite clear if you listen to the hearings that were held last week by the BRAC. Many of the commissioners at that time indicated they did not have the background data upon which the Pentagon's recommendations were made. I think this is just another indication of the fact that we have not been able to proceed with this BRAC round in the way we have in the past. I have actually been through three other BRAC rounds since I have been in the Congress; and just from the questioning that occurred last week at the BRAC hearings from the commissioners, it was clear this is not the time to have a BRAC round. We are in the middle of a war, both in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Many of the commissioners asked questions about the war and the military value because they frankly felt that in a general sense questions had not been answered by the Pentagon, and the Pentagon was not able to answer the questions properly about how this BRAC round was supposed to proceed in the context of an ongoing war.

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I just wanted to comment on what the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth) said. In the last BRAC round in 1995, we had all of the information to back up the Pentagon's recommendations within a few days. It is almost 2 weeks now since the base closure list came out. I think it was the Friday before last. As the gentlewoman mentioned, we are still lacking most of the background information for these recommendations. For example, in the case of Fort Monmouth, which is represented by me and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), the recommendation says that to close Fort Monmouth and move it would cost $822 million and that over the next 6 years, annually, there would be a savings of about $143 million. We do not have the background information that the Pentagon used to make those kinds of number-crunching decisions. The number-crunchers have not given us that kind of information. How are we supposed to prepare for a site visit next week, or regional hearings in early July, without having that information? It is simply inappropriate, and it certainly has not been the case in the past. I have been through three previous BRAC rounds, and that was never the case. That is why the Jones amendment is so important. And particularly when the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones) references military value, this is all about military value. In the case of Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, we are an electronics and communications command for the Army. We basically back up the soldier in the field with equipment that is electronic or related communications. Our point that we have been trying to make is if you close Fort Monmouth over the next few years, that commander in the field who might need some communications or electronics equipment in the next few days or the next few weeks will not have access to it because Fort Monmouth is in the process of moving and people will not be available to do what is necessary for the soldier in the field. How can the Pentagon make recommendations and not take that into mind? We have no indication of how they address that issue because we do not have the backup data. That is why this amendment is important. I urge my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to support it.