Jim Saxton

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my great friend, Chairman Hunter, for yielding me time and for those very kind words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5122, the National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2007. Last week, the Committee on Armed Services approved this bill by an overwhelming bipartisan vote which was, as has been said here before, 60-1. It is not that we do not have policy disagreements, but when it comes to the final vote on a great bill that supports the troops, Members of both parties come together and vote in a resounding, positive way. Our committee well knows that we are a Nation at war, and that the brave young men and women of America who have volunteered for military service are in danger every day in Afghanistan and Iraq and in other places in the world. Those infantrymen who venture from the base and patrol the street are truly valorous, but all of those who are in the line of fire and even in the most secure bases, they take an occasional mortar or rocket attack. And for risking themselves in this way, this country says, ``Thank you.'' Yet, we are making progress. I was privileged just a few short weeks ago to be on the floor of the fledgling Iraqi Parliament as the government was formed. They have a long way to go. But as a veteran legislator myself, it definitely had the feel of a legitimate and promising legislative body. As matters in Iraq progress, we have taken measures to ensure that our broader efforts in the war on terrorism are improved and reinforced. To that end, we have begun to explore ways to improve interagency coordination process and included several items to improve the capabilities of the Special Operations Command. We included two legislative measures to improve Pentagon processes. One would provide for more effective test and evaluation procedures, bringing them into synch with the rapid acquisition authorities which have already been provided to DOD; and the other would speed the development of information technology systems, putting a 5-year limit on the development of new business systems. We continue our successful initiative of last year to develop novel chemical and biological countermeasures, and have supported programs for the equally important medical research and development programs. We continue our scrutiny of the Department's information technology programs, though not as severely as in past years. In fact, our recommended reductions are barely 1 percent of the requested $31 billion in IT budget requests. The bill recommended by the committee recognizes that we remain a Nation at war, but builds upon our capability to fight a more protracted, global war against unseen adversaries, the difficult-to- pinpoint, but nonetheless deadly and real, war against the small number of truly evil terrorists who wish to cripple Western Civilization. We do not like to think about it, but this war came upon us on September 11 and will come to us again if we do not persevere. The enemy is clever, growing desperate, and must be taken seriously by the American people. This bill will help our soldiers keep the enemy on the defensive. In closing, Mr. Chairman, I want to express my appreciation to the members of the Terrorism Subcommittee who contributed to this bill, and particularly the ranking member, Mr. Meehan. This is an excellent bill, and I urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 5122.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, just to conclude this debate, it was not a Republican idea originally to stimulate economic growth by use of the tax policy. It was John Kennedy's idea. When Ronald Reagan was elected President, we Republicans all stuck our chests out and said what a wonderful idea. But it was John Kennedy, who, in his State of the Union speech after he was elected, said we cannot expect to continue to lead the economic world if we fail to set the economic pace at home. And he went on in his speech to detail the tax cut plan that he wanted to put in place. It was put in place and the economy grew. And Ronald Reagan did the same thing. A different plan, same concept. And George Bush I did the same thing, and George W. Bush has embarked upon the same thing. Now, it has been suggested by the minority that somehow we can have tax cuts without cutting taxes of people who pay taxes. This chart to my left shows who pays taxes. As a matter of fact, the top 1 percent of the taxpayers pay 34 percent of the taxes. The top 50 percent of the taxpayers pay 96 percent of the taxes. And that means that about 4 percent of the personal income taxes that are paid in this country are paid by the bottom 50 percent of the wage earners. As Mr. Hulshof just pointed out, many of those folks have been taken off the tax rolls altogether. So the charge that people who earn more money get a larger share of the tax cut, I guess I would just ask this question: If you believe, as I do, that tax cuts stimulate economic growth, and if you are going to have tax cuts at all, then you have to cut taxes from the people who are paying them, and they are almost all in the upper half of the income brackets.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Hulshof).

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As you just indicated, the first hour of this budget debate has been set aside pursuant to the Humphrey-Hawkins section of the Budget Act. Under the rule, the Joint Economic Committee will have this hour evenly divided on two sides. According to most neutral observers, including the Federal Reserve, and a consensus of private economists, the current economic expansion is quite healthy. That is good news. Indeed, if anything, there seems to be a little concern in most quarters that the economy may be growing too fast, a concern that I do not share. The U.S. economy grew 4 percent in 2004 and advanced at a rate of about 3.5 percent in 2005. The growth rate in the first quarter of 2006 is expected to be very robust, probably over 4 percent, consistent with the trend of strong growth seen since 2003. The improvement in economic growth is reflected in other economic figures as well. Let me name a few. Since August of 2003, business payrolls have increased by 5 million jobs. The unemployment rate has declined to 4.8 percent. Consumer spending continues to grow. Homeownership has hit record highs. Household net worth has also reached a record high. Productivity growth continues at a healthy pace. Long-run inflation pressures appear to be contained. Long-term interest rates, including mortgage rates, are still relatively low, although somewhat higher than what they had been previously. The resilience and flexibility of the economy have overcome a number of serious shocks, most recently the hurricanes of last year. Equipment and software investment have been strong over this period. However, with somewhat higher mortgage rates, the housing sector is slowing, although it appears that a soft landing is most likely. It is clear that the Federal Reserve remains poised to keep inflation under control. In a recent policy report to Congress, the Fed noted that the U.S. economy delivered a solid performance in 2005. Furthermore, the Fed observed that ``the U.S. economy should continue to perform well in 2006 and 2007.'' The Fed, along with a number of private economists and government agencies, expects that economic growth in 2006 will be about 3.5 percent, still very healthy growth. This economic growth will continue to expand employment and further reduce unemployment. In summary, overall economic conditions remain positive. The U.S. economy has displayed remarkable flexibility and resilience in dealing with the many shocks, including terrorist attacks and weather effects. The administration forecast for economic growth in 2006 is comparable with those of the blue chip consensus and the Federal Reserve. With growth expected to be about 3.5 percent in 2006, the current economic situation is solid and the outlook remains favorable. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from northwestern Pennsylvania (Mr. English).

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It seems like there must be an election coming to hear some of the rhetoric here on the floor which actually defies reality. Let me try and explain to those who are at least open-minded about the situation what has happened with our economy over the past 5 or 6 years. We all remember during the late 1990s we had very robust growth in the stock market. Things were perking along at a rate that most economists at the time thought was an exuberant time when investments were being made for reasons other than perhaps good, solid rationale. In the third quarter of 2000, the economy began to get soft and in the last quarter of 2000 it did even worse. As we look at the reasons for that, there were a number of economists who concluded different things. One thing became clear, and that was investment was not being made and that something needed to be done. This chart to my left is a chart which shows fixed private, nonresidential investment, in other words, investment in things that would be productive in our economy. As we look at what happened as we began to move through 2001 and 2002, these bars that drop below the line show there was negative investment. People were not investing in productive things; and as a result of that, the economy was not doing well. The administration proposed a fix, and that fix was to do things here in the House of Representatives and in the Senate and through the administration that would encourage the American investor to reengage in investing in productive things. And so in 2003 the House of Representatives and the Senate collectively, together, passed some tax cuts to encourage investment. And those tax cuts, which were temporary in nature which we continue to talk about making permanent, had the desired effect. If we look at this chart and look at when the negative investment ended and positive investment started, it happens to be after those tax cuts went into effect. As a result of reducing the percentage of taxes paid on dividend gains and as a result of tax cuts on capital gains, we see beginning in 2003 and through 2004 and through 2005 and projected to continue by the Fed and by other blue chip economists and blue chip forecasts, we are expecting to see that growth continue through 2006 and 2007. As a matter of fact, we had 4 percent growth in 2004; 3.5 percent growth in 2005; and in the first quarter of 2006, we saw 4 percent growth continue. This is good news for not only the American investor; it is also good news for others in the workforce and in the economy. Here is what happened to employees' payrolls during that period of time. Once again we see some lines that drop below the positive mark. We see some negative growth in nonfarm payrolls as we move through. And as we saw the 2003 tax cuts go into effect, once again we saw the economy rebound and we see employees in nonfarm payrolls begin to increase to much healthier levels than they had been during the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 period of time when investments, productive investments, were not being made. As we sought an answer and the administration proposed the tax cuts and the House and the Senate implemented the tax cuts, once again nonfarm payrolls and employees' payrolls began to grow, as demonstrated by this chart. Finally, gross domestic product, which is how most economists measure growth in the economy, continues to be very good. Beginning in 2003, as our tax cuts went into effect, dividend tax cuts, the taxes on dividends were lowered, the taxes on capital gains were lowered. We see in 2003 and 2004 as we move across here, and as I said before in 2004, we had an average of 4 percent growth. In 2005, we had an average of 3.5 percent growth over the four quarters of that year. The forecast for the first quarter of this year, which is in red, the first of the four lines, the actual forecast is 4.7 percent. I think that might be a little high. I think it might be closer to 4 percent. But that is healthy economic growth, and we continue to see the effect of the policies we have put into place. We expect that the growth may slow somewhat during the first, second, and third quarter; but we believe we will average 3.5 percent this year. I might add one thing that I think is important for us to remember, and that is that the tax cuts, together with other policies, have produced this growth and we need to continue to support those policies as well. The Federal Reserve has been a huge part of this as well. While it is nice for the Congress to take credit with the implementation of the tax policy that we implemented, the Federal Reserve also deserves a lot of credit for what has happened here through the policies that have been brought about through something called ``inflation targeting.'' Today, inflation is very low. Inflation is around 2 percent; and it is around 2 percent because, in my opinion, the Federal Reserve has used this policy of inflation targeting as the cornerstone for Fed policy. As inflationary expectations, as we look to the future, interest rates have continued to be historically low. In spite of the fact there has been a little up-tick in interest rates because of Fed policy in the last year or so, we continue to see affordable interest rates and interest rates that influence investment and continue to provide the stimulus that we need for the kind of economic growth that we have seen since 2003. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make these points. I think this is a very important background for us as we begin this budget debate. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. One additional way to look at our economy and to see how it compares with what we may have seen around the rest of the globe is to simply look at the statistics as to how our U.S. economy has performed as compared to some others. For example, when we look at real GDP growth from the first quarter of 2001 through the fourth quarter of 2005, the U.S. economy expanded at an average annualized rate over all of those times, even though it was slow during the earlier years, at 2.6 percent, and the United States ranked first among its peer group in the world in real GDP growth. In terms of investments of fixed assets, from 2001 to 2005, growth investments in fixed assets as a percentage of GDP growth rose in Canada and the United States but fell in the European Union and Japan. And so once again, the United States was a leader in terms of investment and fixed assets. In terms of industrial production from 2001 to 2005, through 2005, the United States industrial production increased by 7.1 percent, a very, very healthy picture. And I might add that this industrial production increased because of investments, because of investing in productive things, investment brought about by the budgetary policy and the tax policy of the Congress of the United States and the administration. Employment and unemployment. From January 2001 through December 2005, the United States ranked second in employment growth in both absolute and in percentage terms. In the United States employment grew by 5,165,000 jobs, or 3.8 percent. Canada ranked first in percentage growth with 9.3 percent, while the European Union ranked 15, first in total increase of 5.7 million, which was actually 3.4 percent, far below the United States. In December of 2005, the U.S. had an unemployment rate of 4.9 percent, the second lowest among its peer group. If we look at this chart next to me of unemployment rates, if you look at the unemployment rate in the European Union, it was 8.3 percent. If we look at the unemployment rate in Canada, it was 6.4 percent. And at the end of the year, same time frame, the unemployment rate in the United States was 4.8 percent. Just interestingly enough, there is a member of the U.K. Parliament in town today, and I saw him early this morning and he said, I envy you. I said thank you, and why is that? He said, when I go to work at home and I earn an income for my family, 59 percent gets paid to the government. I envy us, too, because we have seen beyond the period of high taxes. We have seen beyond the period of producing an economic policy that in Europe provides today for an 8.3 percent unemployment rate or in Canada of a 6.4 percent unemployment rate. We are fortunate. But it is because of good policy. It is because of the policy of this administration and this Republican Congress that we have a 4.8 percent unemployment rate. Labor productivity is up in our country as well, and that is one of the reasons for this great economic growth. From the first quarter of 2001 to the fourth quarter of 2005, labor productivity grew by 9.5 percent. That means that because of technology that we have invested in, smartly, and partly because of tax policy, we have made our workers more productive than at any time in our history and the most productive work force in the world. I said a word a few minutes ago about price stability. Price stability is what it is today, lack of inflation, inflation of 2 percent or under, because of Fed policy. Chairman Bernanke told me earlier this week that he intends to continue policies that have price stability as the number one goal as inflation targeting continues, to keep our rate of inflation low and to keep interest rates low accordingly. Smart economic policy. And so as we walk through the things that have occurred, partly because of the Congress and partly because of the Federal Reserve, we see that things in our country are doing well, particularly when compared to others. On balance, the U.S. economy has outperformed its peer group and large developed economies in a number of key measures of economic well- being between 2001 and 2005, during the period that George W. Bush has been President. Pro-growth tax policy and good monetary policy have contributed to the superior performance of the U.S. economy, and as my friend from the U.K. Parliament said today, yes, we are proud of this record. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter).

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be withdrawn as a cosponsor of H.R. 4200.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the resolution to create a House Ocean Task Force. During the more than 20 years I have been here in the Congress, I have made it a priority to promote protection of our oceans and effective conservation and management of the living marine resources. From protecting coastal wetlands to cleaning up our estuaries to promoting sustainable fisheries to preventing ocean pollution, each has been a priority. We have accomplished a great deal. But as highlighted in the more than 200 recommendations contained in the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy report released last year, much remains to be done. And as Mr. Gilchrest just pointed out, a bipartisan group to coordinate this activity is necessary, given the fragmentation that has existed in the committee system as it relates to ocean issues for more than 50 years. As a chief sponsor in the House of the legislation to establish the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, I feel it is important to follow through and ensure the recommendations are effectively implemented. We need to build on the momentum generated last year by the release of both the U.S. and the Pew Ocean Policy Commission reports and accomplish a true sea change in the way we utilize and manage our ocean resources. Given the scope and sheer number of recommendations from both commissions, it is also clear that we need to prioritize our efforts. The U.S. commission recommendations to Congress include a range of issues that cannot be addressed by any single committee. This task force will develop a number of recommendations that will be forwarded to the relevant standing committees and work with those committees to see that the recommendations are implemented. I feel it is time that we recognize that in order to make progress, we need a coordinated Congressional focus incorporating policy justifications of each of the standing committees to draft a comprehensive national oceans policy. This task force will enable us to do that, and I might say that the Republican leadership and I hope the Democrat leadership is committed to help in this effort in a very direct way. It took more than 10 years to implement the recommendations of the Stratton Commission. We cannot wait 10 years. The first U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy was an important one, but 10 years is just too long to wait. We need to work together to ensure implementation does not take that long this time. We need to capitalize on the enthusiasm and momentum generated by the commission reports and their recommendations. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this House Ocean Task Force resolution so that we will better be able to deal with ocean issues.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out to my friends on the other side of the aisle that Mr. Gilchrest has spent a great deal of time in working with leadership on this issue, recognizing that there is a process problem here in that the Oceans-21 bill that we all want to see passed is in the jurisdiction of quite some number of committees. For example, the Agriculture Committee has jurisdiction with regard to issues involving runoff. The Armed Services Committee has obvious jurisdiction over issues involving the Navy. The Transportation Committee is where the Coast Guard subcommittee is housed. The Resources Committee, obviously made up of Interior members I might add, has great jurisdiction here, as does the Financial Services Committee and the Education Committee. What Mr. Gilchrest is attempting to do here, and I support his effort very much, is to have a bipartisan commission made up that can work with leadership to work it through this morass, this maze of standing committees. If we do not do that, the sure bet is that this bill in this term is going nowhere.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of my good friend, Phil Rubenstein. Throughout his career, Phil selflessly and passionately worked on behalf of the senior citizens in Ocean County, New Jersey, located in my congressional district. For 30 years, his federal career included work with both the Veterans and Social Security Administrations, and once he ``retired'', he began his second 30-year career--Director of the county's Office of Senior Services. While leading this office, Phil strove to make seniors' lives better both through new innovations and by improving existing services. For example, he established a transportation system to assist elderly and disabled residents with rides to their radiation, chemotherapy and dialysis treatments--a system that won federal support. This is just one example of the many efforts Phil put forth on behalf of Ocean County seniors. Phil's hard work and passion for helping seniors earned him numerous federal, state, county and community service awards, and a local medical center even dedicated its education center to him. During my time in Congress, Phil and I worked closely on a number of issues. Over the years, it became evident just how much he cared about the seniors of Ocean County, and this commitment never ceased to amaze me. On November 25, 2005, Phil passed away at the age of 89. He led a full and purpose-driven life, and I can say with confidence on behalf of all of the seniors in Ocean County and myself that he will be missed.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my good friend, Mary Wells, President and CEO of Family Service of Burlington County as she retires after 35 years of faithful service to the citizens of this great county. Mary earned her Bachelor of Arts degree from Drew University in 1964, and her Masters in Social Work at the Rutgers School of Social Work in 1967. She became a Licensed Clinical Social Worker in 1994. Mrs. Wells was the first chair of the New Jersey Department of Human Services Children's Coordinating Committee, and chaired the New Jersey State Human Services Advisory Council and Executive Committee. She was a 2004 Gubernatorial appointee to the New Jersey Advisory Commission on the Status of Women, a Trustee for Virtua Health, and a Director of the Farmers and Mechanics Bank. She has been recognized by the Alliance for the Mentally Ill as their Administrator Recognition Award recipient, as New Jersey Social Worker of the Year, has received the Humanitarian Award from the New Jersey Region of the National Conference of Christians and Jews, and the Martin Luther King Award for her work in the field of public service and human relations, among other awards too numerous to mention. My staff and I have worked closely with her through the years for the betterment of the community, and her knowledge and compassion will be sorely missed. I wish her a retirement filled with health, happiness and dreams come true.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct pleasure to highlight the extraordinary service of Mr. Stephen Whitmore, who is currently the operations officer for the Department of Public Works at Fort Dix, New Jersey. Born on July 16, 1923, Steve has selflessly served the Nation, the Army and Fort Dix for more than 60 of his 82 years. Mr. Whitmore's service began during World War II when he enlisted in the Army on July 19, 1943. As a soldier assigned to the 1st U.S. Army, he served as a participant in many of the major battles fought in central Europe from November 1944 until April 1946. On April 29, 1946, Steve completed his Army out-processing procedures and immediately began working as a Fort Dix Civil Service Employee. Since then, Mr. Whitmore has worked for the Directorate of Public Works, DPW, in a variety of capacities. As you would expect, Mr. Whitmore's impact on the facilities and infrastructure of Fort Dix has been enormous. The majority of the buildings currently utilized on Fort Dix were built after he arrived in 1945. Consequently, he participated in some manner in the construction of almost all of the facilities in use today and has continued to maintain and repair them throughout his 60-year tenure. Furthermore, all of the utility systems on Fort Dix were either installed or expanded under his personal guidance. In fact, the current electrical grid system for the Installation is one that he designed and either helped construct with a crew of high-tension electricians or oversaw the construction in a supervisory capacity. Also occurring under his watch was the conversion of the Installation's heating systems from coal to oil to natural gas. In addition to Mr. Whitmore's consistent and exceptional execution of his core DPW responsibilities, he has been a key factor in ensuring the successful implementation of nontraditional missions. One of those events concerned a mission assigned to Fort Dix in 1999 entitled Operation Provide Refuge. In short, Fort Dix was tasked to provide temporary housing for over 4,000 Kosovar refugees. Therefore, in addition to performing his duties as Chief of the Public Works Division, Steve assumed responsibility for providing utilities for all of the temporary facilities, installing almost five miles of temporary fencing, constructing playgrounds, maintaining the grounds in all the areas of operation, constructing and installing signs throughout the Installation, establishing and rewiring a welcome center, assisting in the construction and installation of tent frames and even the installation of bed frames and mattresses in the dormitories. His overall work plan execution was magnificent and he guided his personnel through 18 hour work days, 7 days a week to get the work done, while still maintaining tremendous morale throughout his work force. Another monumental mission for which Mr. Whitmore's expertise and ingenuity ensured a successful outcome was the role he played in establishing the security of Fort Dix immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This was a daunting task since the Installation had never been closed to through traffic in its 84-year history. He assembled a crew and equipment and worked with the police to close the Installation in a matter of hours. His expertise and unmatched knowledge of the Installation ensured that the dozens of means of access other than the main entry/exit points were identified and blocked. He has continued those efforts over the past 4 years to identify, develop and execute major projects to convert the temporary measures to permanent security barriers to include the installation of a 3\1/2\-mile-long security fence. Mr. Whitmore's most recent accomplishment pertains to the exceptional work he has done on the development and execution of projects to establish a Forward Operating Base, FOB, to provide vital, realistic training to our soldiers being mobilized in support of the Global War on Terror. Steve planned and supervised the construction of the FOB, which is the largest, most complex FOB in the continental United States. Based on his actions, the FOB was built and maintained to a standard that allows the FOB to house, service, and provide realistic field training to approximately 2000 mobilizing soldiers at one time. Whether it was the electrical system, which he designed and had executed, the water and drain systems so that the Soldiers could take showers, the heating of the tents and even the clearing of the roads when it snowed, he was the one who made it all happen. Mr. Whitmore had the ideas, the ability to bring the ideas to resolution and ambition, energy and interest to accomplish whatever was necessary to make the FOB a success. To this day he continues to provide the oversight for all utility services. His knowledge of the systems is legendary as is his ability to trouble shoot and quickly correct all system problems. He is a shining example of someone who adheres to the Army values in both his professional and personnel life. A man of strong resolve and unmatched abilities, Steve is a true patriot worthy of our Nation's thanks and praise.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sorrow I announce the passing of Kenneth Smith of Manahawkin, New Jersey, after a long battle with cancer. Ken dedicated his life toward enhancing the sandy beaches, not only of New Jersey, but of the entire nation. Ken Smith was a tireless and dedicated advocate for protecting and enhancing our beaches. He knew how much they mean to our state and national economies, and he fought tenaciously to assure the federal government gave beach preservation the priority it deserves. For over a quarter of a century, Ken was America's ``Coastal Advocate.'' Ken spent eight years as a Vice President and as a Director of the American Shore and Beach Preservation (ASBPA); and is a co-founder of the Alliance for a Living Ocean, formed in response to the terrible summer when garbage and other pollution was washing up on the Jersey shore in 1987. The Alliance for a Living Ocean won the Governor's Award for Volunteerism in 1999. Ken, known as ASBPA's ``Tenacious Bulldog at the Beach,'' won the organization's prestigious Morrough P. O'Brien Award in 1999, followed by its Lifetime Achievement Award in 2004. The millions of tourists who come to visit and enjoy our beaches each year from across the nation and from around the world, as well as ail those whose communities are protected from the ravages of storms by these same dunes and healthy beaches, owe Ken a debt of gratitude for all that he accomplished. Ken was the leading force in bringing an awareness to so many people about the importance of working together to preserve not only our beaches and oceans, but the environment and our natural resources as a whole. His dedication to not only protecting the beaches but educating people on the importance of preservation was unparalleled. I extend my sympathies to his wife, Pat, and to his entire family and hope that these words of appreciation will comfort them in their time of sorrow.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the bipartisan substitute. Mr. Chairman, the Endangered Species Act is one of our most farsighted and important conservation laws. For more than 30 years, the Endangered Species Act has sounded the alarm and saved wildlife that we humans have driven toward extinction. Today, we have wolves in Yellowstone, manatees in Florida, and sea otters in California, largely because of the act. In the southern part of New Jersey, we have bald eagles, timber rattlesnakes, and barred owls because of the protections provided by the Endangered Species Act; and by protecting their habitat, we have protected our own habitat. I am concerned that the provisions contained in H.R. 3824 would profoundly alter the act and the process. It contains costly, highly problematic, vague new procedures and ill-conceived tradeoffs that will undermine our ability to conserve fish and wildlife for future generations. Consequently, I join with my colleagues to offer the responsible, bipartisan Miller-Boehlert substitute that reforms the law, answers the concerns of landowners, States, and sportsmen while improving the ability to achieve timely recovery of threatened and endangered fish, wildlife, and plants. Our amendment provides a creative, workable solution that promises better results for recovering endangered species and reducing burdens on landowners. The most important tool needed to halt the decline and recover threatened and endangered species is effective habitat protection. H.R. 3824 fails to protect habitat. The bipartisan amendment has strong provisions to do that. By contrast, our substitute provides a better way of protecting habitat necessary for recovery, with a true focus on recovering species. There is broad consensus in Congress to reform the Endangered Species Act, Mr. Chairman; but it is vital that in doing so we maintain the integrity of the act and our ability to conserve these species for future generations. The Miller-Boehlert amendment will do just that, and I urge my colleagues to support the substitute.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor and privilege today to pay tribute to a leader and warrior, GEN John W. Handy, Commander, United States Transportation Command, USTRANSCOM, and Commander, Air Mobility Command, AMC. General Handy is retiring after honorably serving this great Nation for over 38 years. It has been a distinguished career. General Handy was commissioned in the U.S. Air Force in 1967 and received his pilot wings in 1968. He has accumulated over 5,000 hours piloting just about every mobility aircraft in the U.S. Air Force, to include the C-7A Caribou, the C-130 Hercules, the C-141 Starlifter, the C-37 Gulfstream V, the C-9 Nightingale, the KC-10 Extender, and the Nation's newest mobility airlifter, the C-17 Globemaster III. His hands-on performance, sound judgment, and expertise made him an exceptional Air Force leader. General Handy commanded the 21st Air Force at McGuire Air Force Base. He created and commanded AMC's Tanker Airlift Control Center. He also commanded two airlift wings and a maintenance squadron. He previously served as the Director of Operations and Logistics for USTRANSCOM; the Air Force's Director of Programs and Evaluations; the Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, DC; and Vice Chief of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, DC. It is clear and widely accepted that General Handy is the preeminent mobility and logistics expert in the Department of Defense. In November 2001 General Handy assumed command of US TRANS COM at Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. USTRANSCOM is one of nine unified combatant commands and executes mobility combat operations through its three component commands: The Air Force's IAMC, the Navy's Military Sealift Command, MSC, and the Army's Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, SDDC. General Handy has had the unique distinction of simultaneously commanding both USTRANSCOM and its air component command, AMC. USTRANSCOM provides the synchronized transportation, distribution, and sustainment which projects and maintains our national power. As a global combatant commander, General Handy has made supporting the American warfighter his top priority. Since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, USTRANSCOM, under General Handy's leadership, has moved over 2.4 million passengers, 6.4 million short tons of cargo, and 2.8 billion gallons of fuel in support of the Global War on Terrorism, including Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom. To put this in perspective, the passenger movement is equivalent to moving the entire population of Kansas while the cargo movement is equivalent to moving over 70 Washington Monuments halfway around the world. General Handy, an avid NASCAR racing fan, is fond of stating the amount of fuel moved could run the Nextel Cup Series for the next 19,473 years. America truly has a military deployment and distribution system that is unmatched anywhere in the world. America's military might moves with USTRANSCOM, but so too does its heart. As quick as we are to defend this great nation, Americans are just as quick to assist those in need; and when we do, we turn to the remarkable capabilities of USTRANSCOM. Under General Handy's command, USTRANSCOM has provided humanitarian relief to hurricane victims in the United States, earthquake victims in Iran, and tsunami victims in South Asia, just to name a few. The medicines, supplies, equipment, and personnel that USTRANSCOM delivered to these and other natural disasters ultimately saved lives and eased human suffering. In addition to conducting the largest military movement since World War II and providing unparalleled humanitarian relief, General Handy has made it a priority to transform our Nation's deployment and distribution system, ensuring our ability to project national power where needed with the greatest speed and agility, the highest efficiency, and the most reliable level of trust and accuracy. As the USTRANSCOM commander, General Handy actively took on the role of the Distribution Process Owner for DOD, charged with improving efficiency and interoperability across the entire DOD supply chain. His initiative to develop Joint Deployment and Distribution Operations Centers, JDDOCs, in each of the regional combatant commands continues to improve combat capability and save valuable resources. Regional Combatant Commanders can now plug into the DOD supply chain system, track their requirements, and prioritize their actions. The net result is that troops and equipment are now arriving to the battlefield faster and at less cost. While meeting the needs of the warfighter, General Handy's Distribution Process Owner improvements have generated almost one-half billion dollars in cost avoidances and savings in the global war on terror. General Handy will be the first to tell you he did not accomplish these feats alone. General Handy has led the way in seeking collaborative joint solutions to today's complex combat issues. Those who worked for him and with him, military and civilians from every branch of Service, will miss his leadership and mentorship. They'll miss the stories and humor he used to get his message across. We in Congress will miss his straightforward approach and sound counsel. The nation will miss his devotion to duty, ceaseless drive for improvement, and unwavering support to the American warfighter. General Handy will be remembered as the man who brilliantly led our Nation's mobility forces during the Global War on Terrorism. I know we speak on behalf of our colleagues and a grateful nation in saying thank you to General Handy and his wife, Mickey, for their years of service and sacrifice. General Handy, we wish you well in all your future endeavors and pray that those who follow in your footsteps may continue the legacy of unprecedented support to our great Nation. Good luck and Godspeed.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, on June 28, 2005, a U.S. Military MH-47D Chinook helicopter was hit by enemy fire and crashed near Asadabad, Afghanistan, killing 16 special operations forces operators on board. These special operations forces were attempting to rescue a 4-man SEAL special reconnaissance element which had come under heavy enemy fire. Three members of this SEAL team were killed by enemy fire as they tried to evade a vastly superior enemy force. The special operations forces were engaged in Operation Red Wings, an effort to defeat terrorists operating in Kunar province. The operation was part of a larger campaign by U.S. and Afghan forces to kill and capture fighters from hideouts in eastern Afghanistan. On behalf the United States Congress and its people--I extend my sincerest condolences to the families of these brave Navy SEALs and Army Special Operations Aviators. They need to know that the prayers of a nation are with them at this most difficult time. These men bravely and unselfishly answered the nation's call to defend freedom and protect America and its allies from terrorism. We want the families to know the deaths of their loved ones, their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers, will only strengthen our resolve for ultimate victory in the Global War on Terror. I would now like to pay tribute to those that paid the ultimate price for our freedom. Assigned to the Army's 3rd Battalion, 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), Hunter Army Air Field, GA: Staff Sgt. Shamus O. Goare, 29, of Danville, OH. Chief Warrant Officer Corey J. Goodnature, 35, of Clarks Grove, MN. Sgt. Kip A. Jacoby, 21, of Pompano Beach, FL. Sgt. 1st Class Marcus V. Muralles, 33, of Shelbyville, IN. Maj. Stephen C. Reich, 34, of Washington Depot, CN. Sgt. 1st Class Michael L. Russell, 31, of Stafford, VA. Chief Warrant Officer Chris J. Scherkenbach, 40, of Jacksonville, FL. Assigned the Army's Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), Fort Campbell, KY: Master Sgt. James W. Ponder III, 36, of Franklin, TN. Assigned to SEAL Team Ten, Virginia Beach, VA: Chief Petty Officer Jacques J. Fontan, 36, of New Orleans,

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman, I am in strong opposition to the underlying amendment, and I also have great concerns about the unanimous consent request. Mr. Chairman, I believe the unanimous consent request is designed to make minimal changes in the underlying amendment. I also believe that the unanimous consent request is designed to make the bill less objectionable to some Members and thereby encourage them to vote for it. I am so opposed to the underlying amendment that I am therefore opposed to the unanimous consent request.

Mr. SAXTON. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, further reserving the right to object, I appreciate the gentleman's explanation. The underlying amendment makes unnecessary disclosure of very sensitive information. It is burdensome upon each of the departments that it requires this disclosure to be brought forward, and as a matter of fact, the explanation that the gentleman just gave saying that makes it only available to HPSCI and SSCI, the two intelligence committees, does not include the Committee on Armed Services, which has great responsibility for military defense intelligence. So I do object, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of an extraordinary gentleman who I am honored to call a friend. On July 1, 2005, Rabbi Richard Levine will retire after 41 years of service as the spiritual leader of Congregation Adath Emanu-El. Since 1964, Rabbi Levine has worked tirelessly on behalf of his Congregation and the greater Jewish community of southern New Jersey. As my friend continues his journey after retirement, it is with great pride and admiration that I look back on his tenure as a spiritual and community leader. After graduating from the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, Richard Levine went on to the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion where-upon completion of his studies, he was ordained as a Rabbi. Arriving in Willingboro, New Jersey in 1964, Rabbi Levine began to get involved with a countless number of Jewish and non-sectarian organizations and causes. In addition to holding the Presidency of the Delaware Valley Association of Reform Rabbis and the Tri-County Board of Rabbis, he was the first New Jersey Rabbi ever to serve as President of the Greater Philadelphia Board of Rabbis. He has served on the Boards of the Jewish Federation of Southern New Jersey, Jewish Family and Children Services and the Board of Jewish Education. Rabbi Levine's dedication to our local community goes far beyond his service on Rabbinical and community boards. Over the years he has worked with the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, Operation Head Start, various multi-ethnic human relations organizations and has taught classes at local schools. He has served with distinction as a ``scholar in residence'' in other communities and has led over a dozen trips to Israel. During these trips, the participants enjoy his first- hand knowledge of the country, its history, people and spiritual meaning. Today, as we honor the accomplishments of this exceptional American, Rabbi Levine is still hard at work, as the patriarch of a growing family. He and his lovely wife Judith are the proud parents of nine children and are celebrating the arrival of their eighth grandchild! As a father, grandfather and rabbi, Richard Levine has earned the respect, gratitude and admiration of all of us who have had the privilege to work with him over the years. Mr. Speaker, my friend Richard Levine has dedicated his professional life to the service of his people and the greater community of which I am honored to be a part. As he begins his well-earned retirement, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude for his friendship, leadership and service.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, to begin, let me extend my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) for his assistance in bringing this resolution to the floor. The men and women of our Armed Forces are fortunate to have such a dedicated person serving as chairman of the Committee on Armed Services and I am deeply honored to serve with him. Madam Speaker, on November 4, 1979, Americans were shocked by the news that terrorists had stormed our embassy in Tehran and took 66 of our fellow citizens hostage. This deplorable act of barbarism caught our Nation off guard and, frankly, ill-prepared to fully realize the growing threat in the region. As days became weeks and weeks became months, back-channel diplomacy was failing. The American people were becoming impatient and a wide array of individuals were demanding action. As a Nation, the United States was being held hostage by a regime that had no intention of negotiating. Finally, President Carter made the decision that enough was enough; it was time to bring our people home. On April 16, 1980 a plan called ``Operation Eagle Claw'' was approved, and our Nation's Special Operations Forces were prepared to answer the call. Madam Speaker, 8 days later on April 24, a task force of highly trained personnel from the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force was formed. The task force was comprised of highly trained individuals and intensely dedicated people, probably the most dedicated ever assembled to set forth on a mission that would end abruptly in disaster. The plan called for 8 helicopters, 12 airplanes and a lethal combination of United States Army Special Operations Forces, Army Rangers, Air Force Special Operations Wing personnel, and United States Navy, Marine, and Air Force pilots to work without a unified command structure deep inside hostile territory, a daunting task. The mission's first objective called for the task force to rendezvous at a location named Desert One. Once there, U.S. Special Forces combat controllers and translators were to be offloaded from Air Force airplanes, C-130s, and reloaded onto Navy helicopters which would take them to the outskirts of Tehran, in preparation for the final rescue. Before the rendezvous could even take place, weather problems and mechanical failures plagued the mission. Eight helicopters took off from the USS Nimitz, but only 6, the bare minimum required to complete the mission successfully, successfully arrived at Desert One. Once the birds were on the ground, Operation Eagle Claw received its final blow when one of the remaining helicopters' hydraulic system malfunctioned and therefore rendered the bird useless for the final assault on Tehran. At that point, despite the desired and sheer ability of the Special Operations Forces on the ground, the order to abort the mission was given. As the helicopters and airplanes maneuvered to return to their respective launching points, another disaster struck. One of the helicopters collided with a parked C-130 and both aircraft erupted in flames. In the chaos that followed, the soldiers on the ground acted courageously, with absolutely no regard for their personal safety, and managed to save many of their colleagues. But despite this uncanny display of bravery, 8 of America's finest young men lost their lives: Captain Harold L. Lewis, Jr., Captain Lyn D. McIntosh, Captain Richard L. Baake, Captain Charles McMillan, Master Sergeant Joel C. Mayo, Staff Sergeant Dewey Johnson, Sergeant John D. Harvey, and Corporal George N. Holmes. They deserve our admiration and appreciation for the supreme sacrifice made on behalf of our country. This morning, Madam Speaker, when I looked at my e-mail, I had received an e-mail from someone who read an op-ed which was published, which I wrote for the Washington Times, which was published yesterday. I would like to read it in part. He says: I will never forget the day, as a young second lieutenant serving in the 82nd Air Force Division, across Fort Bragg from Special Forces Headquarters, we knew very little about the Special Forces people at that time, but I did know the leader's daughter. So in addition to recognizing that these were America's finest warriors with all the physical strength, hooah, and military skills one can imagine, I also appreciated that they had families who loved them dearly and who suffered anguish, fear, and loss in Eagle Claw. So that is what I recall from my 25 years ago and what I recall every day when I open the newspaper and read of the tremendous sacrifice our forces make, each of them with families who love them. Madam Speaker, although the results of the mission were tragic, Operation Eagle Claw's contribution to the American military was invaluable. One of the central recommendations made by the investigative commission called upon the military commanders and policy makers to look at ways to bring together various Special Operations Forces of each branch of the military. This crucial observation led to the creation of the United States Special Operations Command, SOCOM, a model of jointness that serves as an example of the transformed 21st century military which we are seeking to help create. Today, SOCOM officers and soldiers and others who are serving our Nation serve under one command structure, and they are leading the war on terror. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities, I have the distinct honor of working with the members of SOCOM. It is clear that our Nation's Special Operations Forces are the most unified, well equipped and fiercest fighting force in the world. In the post-911 world that we live in, their contribution to our national security is more important than ever. Madam Speaker, we stand here today in remembrance of the lives that were lost in Operation Eagle Claw. We are also thankful for the men who have followed in their footsteps. As the warriors of SOCOM continue to lead the fight in the war on terror, I join my colleagues in applauding their efforts and successes and thanking them for their dedication to our country. The meaning of Operation Eagle Claw will be remembered in different ways by different people, but it will always be remembered. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.