Scott Perry

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, today is an important anniversary. On November 19, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address. Prior to this famous address, Lincoln arrived at the Gettysburg train station. Earlier this year, the House passed my bill to permanently preserve this historic landmark without utilizing any federal funds. Currently, this bill awaits consideration by the full Senate. The Battle of Gettysburg marks a turning point in American history. By preserving the Lincoln train station, I hope to inspire my fellow citizens to learn and appreciate the significance of the Gettysburg Campaign, the Gettysburg Address, the Civil War, and the bravery of the soldiers who, in President Lincoln's powerful words, gave the last full measure of devotion.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and thank a constituent from the wonderful little town of Biglerville, Pennsylvania, for his service and sacrifice to spread the cooperative principle of concern for community. Jay Kroeze, a lead lineman at Adams Electric Cooperative, volunteered for the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association's International Foundation in Haiti as part of the Caracol Community Electrification Project. He spent 2 weeks in northern Haiti building and upgrading more than a mile and a half of power lines to help communities receive affordable, safe, and reliable electricity. To date, more than 4,800 consumers in the northern part of Haiti now have access to electricity. Some now have TVs. A few have water treatment plants. Doctors can provide better care to patients, and residents have opened their own small businesses. National Rural Electric Cooperative Association International currently is providing support to USAID in Haiti to bring safe, reliable, and affordable electricity to areas in northern Haiti. On behalf of the Fourth Congressional District of Pennsylvania, I commend Jay Kroeze and the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association International Foundation for their tireless efforts in Haiti and around the world.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by thanking the great gentleman from Utah who is, indeed, a friend, and I thank him for his service. We have heard much tonight about Israel and the rockets and everything that is happening in that part of the world, but one thing we haven't talked about much is the United Nations Human Rights Council, which really can't be taken seriously as a human rights organization, and I will tell you why. Let's talk about some of the members on that: Cuba, Russia, Congo, Ivory Coast, Venezuela, and China. When you think about Cuba and Venezuela, they outlaw political demonstrations in their country, but yet they are on the Human Rights Council judging Israel. When you think about Ivory Coast or Congo, they allow genital mutilation in their country, yet they are judging Israel. Now, this commission established a commission to probe alleged war crimes in violation of international law by Israel for defending its citizens against rocket attacks and terror tunnels. I mean, really? A competition to probe the war crimes from Israel. Now, what they should be doing, instead, is focusing on Hamas, which uses its citizens as human shields while its commanders flee to bunkers. If Hamas uses human shields to protect its rockets, I mean, is that Israel's fault for defending itself? But somehow, as Americans, we are told that that is what we should believe. Everybody--everybody--in this Chamber, every American is saddened by the tragic loss of innocent life on both sides of the conflict. However, let's be clear. It is Hamas, a designated terrorist organization, that has refused to deescalate this conflict. Recently, I heard a reporter and some other folks saying: Well, in Gaza, where should the Palestinians go? It is small. There is nowhere to go to avoid the rockets from Israel. Where should they go? They should stay right there and quit firing on Israel, quit digging tunnels into Israel. That is what they should do, and then this problem would relieve itself. I mean, who dug these tunnels? Who has fired over 2,000 rockets into Israel? They don't have to go anywhere. They just need to quit attacking Israel. No U.S. funds should go towards the Palestinian Authority or its institution so long as Hamas is part of a unity Palestinian Government. Secretary Kerry's recent actions have actually hampered a cease-fire. This administration continues to befriend our enemies and make enemies of our friends, and it must stop, Mr. Speaker. It is critical for the U.S. to reiterate our support for our ally, our only ally there, which is Israel, including its right of its people to live in peace and to defend itself.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 437 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' Stated against:

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, 400 rocket attacks from Gaza in the past 3 weeks--Israel has made several attempts to defuse the issue and the situation. This is how Hamas responded: ``We will not agree to quiet in exchange for quiet. If Israel does not agree to our demands, I expect we will continue this battle.'' Can you imagine that? Demands from Hamas that Israel not respond to rocket attacks. That is the only way you will get quiet for quiet between Israel and Hamas. Now, we all know where this recent exchange started. On June 12, the abduction and subsequent murder of three Israeli teenagers, suspected by Hamas members, inflamed the situation, and then it was pushed over the edge by a murder of a Palestinian boy by Jewish extremists, Mr. Speaker. There is a difference between how both sides act. From the Israeli Prime Minister, ``I unequivocally condemn the murder of a Palestinian youth in Jerusalem. Murder, riots, incitement, vigilantism--they have no place in our democracy.'' Israel quickly tracked down and arrested the teens' suspected murderers--tracked them down and arrested them and is prosecuting them. What is the response from Hamas? What is the like response? In response, they launched nearly 400 rockets at Israel since June 14. For a month, this has been going on--into their population centers, not into military targets, Mr. Speaker, but population centers. Now, last week, I attended a briefing with Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer to discuss the ongoing operation in Gaza, and one of the things I found interesting was all the members that were there from Israel had on their phones an application which sounded an air raid siren every time one sounded in Israel. We could scarcely get through the briefing because they were just continually going off all around the room. I imagined myself in my hometown, hunkered down in my basement against a rocket attack. No civilization should live this way. Interestingly enough, we viewed surveillance video of Hamas members using their own people as human shields. The Israelis actually send a warning shot--this is the building we are going to hit, this is where you are making rockets, and we are going to attack it next. You would think that people would run from the building, knowing it is going to be blown up, but what does Hamas do? They send people, Mr. Speaker, to the building. I would remind everybody the responsibility for civilian casualties, when those civilians are used as human shields, lies with the party that deliberately places them at risk, namely, Hamas. Understand, they are placing their launch sites and their factories next to mosques, next to churches, next to hospitals, next to schools. The plan is--their intent is to make sure that, when Israel responds, responds to an attack, that there are maximum casualties of civilians, so that Americans will think that the Israelis are bad, that the narrative is that Israelis are using an unmeasured response--response. Remember, it is a response, Mr. Speaker. No other country faces daily rocket attacks against its civilians, nor would any, nor should any other nation tolerate such violence, and we strongly condemn the continued rocket fire into Israel and the deliberate targeting, again, Mr. Speaker, of citizens. Now, this can all end. President Mahmoud Abbas can renounce the Hamas-backed unity government. How are we ever going to get to peace when their unity government is unified with terrorists, Mr. Speaker? Since the beginning of July, the Palestinian terrorists have fired hundreds of missiles and projectiles at the population centers in Israel and, just recently, rejected the cease-fire negotiated by Egypt. What is it that they want? Well, we know what they want. They want Israel obliterated from the map, Mr. Speaker. For our administration, who has at times been with Israel--but not enough times--I would urge them, instead of calling on restraint for Israel, asking Israel to restrain--they are responding, Mr. Speaker, to attacks on their civilian population. Instead of asking them to restrain, demand the PA denounce, renounce Hamas and start supporting Israel and give them the necessary resources to meet this threat.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking Chairman Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for their diligence in this legislation. Mr. Chairman, I think every single American can agree that reducing our dependence on foreign oil is something that--and all foreign sources of energy--should be something that we should pursue, and in that vein, renewables is a significant component, but this bill cuts hydropower over $20 million. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would seek to restore funding specifically--not to all renewables--but to hydropower, and it is offset with a Department of Energy administrative cost. That is where the money is coming from. According to the budget office, the amendment actually reduces outlays by $8 million. Now, hydropower is available in every region of the country. It is not just the east coast. It is the whole way across the country, to the point that 2,200 hydropower plants provide America its most abundant source of clean, renewable electricity and accounts for 67 percent of domestic renewable generation or 7 percent of the total electricity generated. This could increase that 15 percent, creating over 1 million jobs by 2025--1.4 million, according to my figures. Mr. Chairman, hydroelectricity is predictable. You can count on it. It is not variable. You don't have to count on the wind blowing. You don't have to count on the Sun shining. Twenty-four hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, as long as the rain is falling and the rivers are flowing, we are generating power. You don't need a bank of batteries. You don't need the wind to be blowing. You don't need an alternative source of base load powers being generated. It provides it at a relatively low-maintenance cost. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, I would contend that it is the most efficient and economic form of renewable energy. It is unobtrusive. It is not bothering anybody. It is sitting there. You don't have to worry about birds flying into it or bats being killed on its blades. The fish swim right through it. Now, it does face a significant regulatory approval process. There is much red tape, which equates to up to 15 years in permitting cycles, and that is a detractor that needs to be addressed, so much so that there are now 60,000 megawatts of preliminary permits and projects awaiting final approval and are pending before the commission in 45 of our 50 States--45 of our 50 States. We can have this electricity if we can get through this red tape, Mr. Chairman. Of our 80,000 dams in the United States, 600--600 of them-- have an immediate capability to produce energy at this moment. Harnessing conventional hydroenergy will create a truly renewable and green energy source for our country. It is not just about Pennsylvania, and it is not just about the Fourth District that I represent. It is about all of our country becoming energy independent on renewable. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with the chairman in the future on this and would ask, at this point, unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I am on the House floor, privileged to continue with the recitation. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, U.S. Customs and Border Protection currently possesses a very large fleet of unmanned aerial systems, or UAS's. Certainly, this technology can be a valuable asset. We want them to use it to our benefit on the border to enforce border security. Between 2010 and 2012, the CBP flew nearly 700 missions on behalf of other Federal, State, and local agencies. They were not flying the border, in other words. As a matter of fact, some agencies have absolutely nothing to do with border security, such as the U.S. Forest Service and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. I have researched this issue, Mr. Speaker, and found no codified procedures for how DHS loans their drones out. Certainly, the use of drones for unapproved purposes is unacceptable and poses a myriad of civil liberty concerns, not to mention the fact that it potentially abuses taxpayer dollars, Mr. Speaker. We need to ensure proper oversight is conducted, civil liberties are upheld, and taxpayer dollars aren't squandered.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my sincere condolences to the people of Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia affected by severe flooding in recent weeks. The epic flooding is the worst the region has seen in 120 years. Making matters worse, there are reports that landmines from the most recent Balkan war are being shifted due to the landslides, only adding to the dangers of people and rescuers in the affected areas. Having experienced flooding that displaces families myself and, more importantly, having served in the region during my military career, the people of the Balkans hold a special place in my heart. My thoughts and prayers are with them, and I wish them Godspeed.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Wolf for offering me this opportunity. This amendment prohibits the funding for NASA's Advanced Food Technology project, the AFT. The AFT project is responsible for providing spaceflight crews with a food system that is safe, nutritious, and acceptable to the crew while efficiently balancing appropriate vehicle mass, volume, waste, and food preparation time for exploration missions to Mars. The problem is we are not going to Mars anytime soon. Since we have accepted as a fact that other nations such as Russia will be taking the lead on space exploration and we have no plans to go back into space over the next fiscal year--at least to Mars--there is no reason to waste taxpayer money on food research for a mission to Mars. This project has been highlighted as a source of waste for years by my colleagues in the United States Senate, starting with NASA's use of taxpayer money to develop pizza and hundreds of other recipes for, again, a mission to Mars, which NASA has no plans to undertake. I want to ensure that taxpayer funding is not wasted on projects that are not going to happen. I urge passage of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, it is my understanding the chairman accepts the amendment. If that is the case, I yield to the chairman.

Mr. PERRY. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chair.

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring awareness to the outrageous, the almost unimaginable findings from the ongoing VA inspector general's review of the Phoenix Health Care System and now some two dozen other facilities. The stated VHA goal is a 14-day wait for a first-time primary care appointment--14 days, 2 weeks. It is a little much for some, but it seems appropriate, reasonable for many. That is their goal. Whether I agree with it or not, that is their goal. However, I am going to read from the executive summary of the inspector general's allegations: ``Allegations at the Phoenix HCS include gross mismanagement of VA resources and criminal misconduct by VA senior hospital leadership, creating systemic patient safety issues and possible wrongful deaths. While our work is not complete, we have substantiated that significant delays in access to care negatively impacted the quality of care at this medical facility.'' Mr. Speaker, that is breathtaking. That is breathtaking. This is our Federal Government. Falsified data reported last year by Phoenix HCS showed veterans waited, on average, 24 days for their first primary care appointment. Falsified data said that they waited an average of 24 days; however, the recent IG report found that veterans actually waited, on average, 115 days for their first primary care appointment, with approximately 84 percent of those waiting more than 14 days, which was the stated goal. Mr. Speaker, 115 days for their first appointment. That is the appointment where you go talk to the doctor and you tell him what is wrong or what you think is wrong and he starts making an assessment. That is not treatment. That is just an appointment with the doctor. Mr. Speaker, 115 days. To put it another way, VA management at Phoenix HCS met 16 percent of its wait time goal, and those folks still received bonuses for that action. The folks that do the work got a bonus for meeting 16 percent of their goal. When people say to you, as a Representative, there are things wrong with the Federal Government, Mr. Speaker, this is what is wrong with the Federal Government. Even after cooking the books, the stated goal of an average 14-day wait time was not met. Even after that. Now, I was proud to vote for Chairman Miller's VA Accountability Act last week, but it is a shame--I don't know what it is--that it takes an act of Congress to fire somebody in the Federal Government. If you are the Secretary and you find somebody that has done something wrong--and in these cases, potentially criminal--and you can't fire them, what is going on here? Now, this is not a new circumstance. We have actually known about it for years. Republicans--and I have been here a year and a half--and, I imagine, Democrats have been complaining for years about this because they see it in their districts. But nothing has been done. And some will say, well, Congress hasn't appropriated the right money. Three times the amount of money since 2001 has gone to the VA for care--for care. Three times it has been increased. Mr. Speaker, where the President says he has got a pen and a phone, I beseech you--I beseech him to call up a veteran in this circumstance. Use the phone. Use your pen for an executive order and fix this. It is not the words, Mr. President--we are all frustrated, and we are all infuriated by this--but it is actions. These are members of the military, men and women who have served, men and women of action. Words are cheap, Mr. Speaker. It is actions that we require. JFK said in one of his speeches that a nation is revealed by whom it honors. What is revealed by what is happening now, what has been happening, and what hasn't been happening? Now, just to kind of show where our priorities are, let's talk about what you can get with an access card. This gentleman I am reading about bought a swordfish steak at $18.99 a pound or went to the gourmet coffee section and ground up some roasted fresh beans. I guess it is okay to buy your Halloween candy with an access card. We can provide an access card for that, but we can't find a way to provide for the veterans who took an oath? Mr. Speaker, they said: I will defend this country, I will lay my life down, and I won't question. Mine is not to ask why, mine is to do or die. Our side of the deal is that we pay, we equip you, and prepare you to fight and win, and after you come home all busted up and changed, we will take care of you. Oh, that is what we say, but apparently that is not what we do. We can find a way to pay for these things, but not for that obligation. Mr. Speaker, resignation is fine. But that is not going to fix it. We request the administration to take action and fix it.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate four members of the Pennsylvania National Guard who placed among the top four teams in the national Sullivan Cup armor competition, held on May 11-15 of this year, in Fort Benning, Georgia. Sergeant First Class Bryan Bailey, Sergeant Michael Schultz, Specialist Timothy Humpal, and Specialist Zachary Zondory represented the 3-103rd Armor Battalion, 55th Armored Brigade, 28th Infantry Division, who came in fourth out of only 17 U.S. Army, Marine Corps, and Canadian tank crews. The toughness, skill level, and experience demonstrated by our Guard soldiers is further proof that the 55th Armored Brigade not only is one of the elite brigades in the entire U.S. Army, but that the Guard is-- absolutely is--ready, trained, and capable.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 237, I inadvertently voted in the affirmative when I intended to vote in the negative. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Blumenauer

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, I would like to thank Mr. Graves from Missouri for taking the lead on this amendment, and I would like to thank Chairman McKeon for including this amendment in this en bloc package. After 12 years of combat coming to a close and shifting security priorities, a commission to evaluate Army force structure is, indeed, appropriate. The Pentagon is still operating with assumptions, metrics and policies from the early 2000s. What we need to be doing is looking at shaping the force of the future. What the future missions and force mixture between active-guard-reserve should be is a question that should be thoroughly assessed. To determine how the future of our total Army will be shaped for decades to come, we should select the more comprehensive commission and take the additional few months to do a comprehensive analysis with the best personnel and minds available. Madam Chairman, the security of the Nation depends upon it.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor East Berlin, Pennsylvania, on its 250th anniversary. The borough was founded on May 8, 1764, by John Frankenberger, a Prussian, who purchased 200 acres of land from Thomas and Richard Penn. John laid out a town with 85 lots, one main street, four cross streets, and five alleys. He named the town ``Berlin'' after his native town in Prussia. East was added to the name in 1827, when the town post office was established. Today, East Berlin is a thriving community of over 1,400 residents in Adams County. I am proud to congratulate East Berlin on this momentous day and wish the borough another successful 250 years.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support and recognition of Israel's Independence Day. Israel is one of our closest allies in the Middle East, and for 66 years it has been the stronghold of democracy and a model for those who seek freedom and prosperity. The success of the Jewish State makes it a target for oppressive regimes that seek the destruction of Western ideals, such as the advancement of women's rights. Iran is chief among these threats. It has openly and repeatedly called for Israel's eradication. This threat may become a reality if Iran is allowed to obtain nuclear weapons. Mr. Speaker, we simply can't allow that to happen. This administration must be clear-eyed in dealing with Iran, and it must do whatever is necessary to protect our vital interests in the region, including Israel. With that, I offer my sincere congratulations to our Israeli friends on this 66th anniversary of their country's independence and wish them a very happy and prosperous Independence Day.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today to discuss the comments made recently by Secretary Kerry regarding Israel and apartheid. I am not going to be one of the many people that are probably calling for Secretary Kerry's resignation in that regard. I too work in the arena of public policy, and I understand that sometimes you make mistakes in the things you say, you say things that you didn't necessarily intend to say. I think it is very instructive to talk about it for just a few moments here. I want to remind everybody that Israel first fought a War of Independence in 1948 and 1949, and then fought again in 1967 in the Six Day War and then again in 1973 with the Yom Kippur War. During these periods of time, they were attacked, unilaterally attacked by their neighbors. Some people say: Well, we need to go back to those pre-1967 borders. I ask anybody who was attacked, who has been in a fight where somebody sucker-punched them, who was the aggressor, why is it incumbent upon Israel to return the spoils of the war? Folks attacked them, they fought the war, and they won, and they want to secure their population. Because of that, some people think that somehow Israel is the oppressor. They reacted to an act of aggression. I just want to also read statements from President Obama from 2008 regarding the usage of the term ``apartheid'': There's no doubt that Israel and the Palestinians have tough issues to work out to get to the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security, but injecting a term like apartheid into the discussion doesn't advance that goal. It's emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it's not what I believe. That is not what Americans believe either. I think for me and what I want to tell anybody that is watching and anybody that is listening is, this should be proof positive; finally, the evidence of what many conservatives and many people who support Israel have been saying for the last 6 years. Finally, what we are seeing is--if this isn't proof, I don't know what is--the thoughts and the feeling and the mindset and what is in the heart of this administration regarding Israel. This is what they believe. This is who they are. If you support Israel as the only ally, the only true ally for America in that part of the world, if that is who you support, then you must recognize this for what this is, Mr. Speaker. It is an abandoning. It is not only an abandoning of our ally, our great ally and our true friend, but is a castigation of who they are. When we think about what apartheid is, Israel doesn't represent any of that. It is an open democracy that lets people live freely and participate within the confines of their security situation, and as the representative before me discussed, rockets being rained down upon them, homicide bombers coming into their children's school and blowing up their children, blowing up their buses on a busy street or a cafe where people are just trying to have a meal. That is their daily life. And we are supposed to castigate them for defending their nation, for their leaders defending their nation against that, and that is somehow apartheid? The physical, racial, financial, I mean the spiritual and emotional oppression for the sake of race, that is apartheid. That is not what Israel is doing. That is not what Israel is about. That is not what Israel has done. Israel has tried to live peaceably in that region of the world among its neighbors. It has fought to exist. It fights every day to exist. For the Secretary of State to use that term in describing who Israel is, what they are as a people, what they are as a government, it is not only reprehensible, it in my mind truly defines, it very clearly illustrates what this administration believes. So if you are a supporter of Israel, if you are a supporter of the only ally, the true ally of the United States in that region of the world, it is time for you to take stock. If you have been a supporter of this administration, it is time for you to take stock in that support. Is it justified? Is it realistic? Is it what you really believe? Because if you believe what this administration believes, then you believe that the only answer is for Israel to continue to give, to give of itself to its neighbors who hate it, who are continually trying to destroy it, who refuse after all these years--1947--after all these years, continue to refuse as a matter of just negotiation to acknowledge Israel's right to exist as a state. How much longer will it take, Mr. Speaker? How many more years until these other organizations--you know, the taxpayers, the United States taxpayers, fund the Palestinian Authority and their effort to pay stipends to prisoners who blow up Israelis, who blow them up. It is seen as their job. It is like a paycheck. If you go to prison, you get paid for doing it, and the more heinous it is, the more you get paid. Yet, somehow Israel is supposed to turn the other cheek yet again and give of itself to people that blow it up. Even after they give, let's face it, after they give, because they have offered to give time and time and time again, we all know, Mr. Speaker, it is not going to be enough. Because the people that call Jews and Israel descendants of apes and dogs and pigs, they are not going to stop thinking that just because Israel agrees to whatever concession they demand. They won't stop until there is no Israel. That is their goal. That has been their stated goal, and it hasn't changed. Mr. Speaker, I just want to again highlight to anybody that has supported this administration because of their support for Israel, see what it is, look it in the face. It has shown itself finally for what it truly is. It is not support of Israel, it is support of a political agenda that makes Israel continue to bleed, and it is unacceptable for the United States of America to turn its back on this longstanding ally. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Jane Tucker of Dallastown, Pennsylvania, who was honored at today's Congressional Victims' Rights Caucus Awards. Jane endured years of life-threatening physical and mental abuse at the hands of her first husband in the 1950s. With tenacity and perseverance, she devoted decades of her life to founding ACCESS-York, York County, Pennsylvania's service provider for victims fleeing domestic violence. Jane continues to this very day, this very moment, as a volunteer at ACCESS-York, and she serves as the inspiration and motivation to countless victims who turn to ACCESS-York for help, understanding and protection. She is the epitome of resilience, strength, compassion and integrity. From a battered mother to a founding mother of ACCESS-York, Jane Tucker's life is a story of triumph over tragedy, and I am absolutely proud and humbled to be part of honoring her accomplishment with the unsung hero award today.

Mr. PERRY

Mr. PERRY. If the gentleman would yield, I am just curious--you have spent more time here than I have--what was the impetus for the current law which restricts DOD and commanders, as an installation commander myself, from exacting our own authority based on the Constitution?