Pete Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

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

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

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to recognize Rena Bitter, a Dallas native and a Foreign Service officer currently serving as Consular Chief at the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Jordan, for winning the 2006 Thomas Jefferson Award presented by American Citizens Abroad (ACA). This honor is extended to State Department employees who have displayed exemplary service to the American community overseas. ACA founded this award to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the birth of Thomas Jefferson, America's first Secretary of State and third President. They described Jefferson as ``the quintessential Overseas American'' who lived outside the new republic for many years while helping to secure its independence and promote its political, economic and national security interests. In a similar manner, Rena serves our country today as Jefferson once served. Rena entered the Foreign Service in 1994 having previously served in Mexico City, Mexico; Bogota, Colombia; and London, England. After spending a year with the British Foreign Office, Rena served as Chief of the Nonimmigrant Visa Unit at the American Embassy in London. During an assignment in Washington, DC, Rena served as a Special Assistant to former Secretary of State Colin Powell. Rena received additional leadership awards while serving both at the American Embassy in London and the office of the Secretary of State. Currently in Amman, Rena has a wide range of responsibilities. She not only assists American citizens living and working in Jordan, but supports David Abell (co-winner of this award) and his co-workers at the U.S. Embassy in Iraq. Rena's dedicated efforts provide for the needs of our fellow citizens in very difficult times. As a testimony of her dedication to Americans overseas, one of her supervisors once wrote that ``If my grandkids were to find themselves in trouble, I would hope it would be Rena, or someone like her, who would be available'' to help them. I wish Rena Bitter all the best, and I thank her for her dedicated service to the American citizens overseas.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4, the Medicare part D Government Interference Plan, which is what the Democrats have today. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues on the other side have made it very clear: They believe that price controls will beat what the marketplace has done, and yet the Congressional Budget Office has clearly said that is not true, there would be no savings. What would their plan do, Mr. Speaker? They talk about the important part of what the VA does. Of over 3.8 million Medicare eligible beneficiaries enrolled in the VA, over 1 million have opted to participate in part D because it provides more flexibility and choice for the drugs that they want and they need. Only 38 percent of the drugs that were approved by the FDA in the 1990s and only 19 percent since 2000 are available on the VA formulary. The Democrats want this for our seniors. Mr. Speaker, I believe that doctors and patients should control the medicines that are available, and I think they should be available to every single senior. We want to make sure that continues. I oppose this bill.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a press release by the Employment Policies Institute and an op-ed by George Will that was in the Dallas Morning News on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I rise today opposed to this bill, this bill that did not go through regular order nor through the Rules Committee, not even to be a secret vote in the Rules Committee. And I argue against this bill for the reasons we have not had a chance to vet the bill, to tell the truth that there will be over 1.6 million people that will lose their job directly related to this action by Washington, D.C., The Federalist Society, the Democratic Party in Washington, D.C., who will control not only their jobs but take away from small businesses the opportunity to be competitive in a competitive world. Mr. Speaker, we are going to cause these 1.6 million people to lose their jobs as a result of their inability to be able to compete in marketplaces and to raise their own wages. Mr. Speaker, I will tell you that these 1.6 million jobs were important to families and people. It may not be much of a job. It may be in a small rural community, but they were jobs that were important to those people. They are jobs, even if not high-paying jobs, that would provide them the opportunity to get up and find self-worth and go and do their very best, perhaps not just with limited resources but with the very best that community may offer. These are the types of stories that would be told if we had followed regular order, if the committees had been able to vet this, if we had known more about the ability to hear experts testify about what is actually going to happen. We hear the words about food on the table. We hear about having people earn more money. That is great. But 1.6 million jobs will be lost from our economy as a result of what the Democrat Party does. I say, shame on us. I will oppose this. I will be for the Republican alternative that encourages better jobs. Employment Policies Institute: Minimum Wage Hike Threatens Healthy U.S. Economy Washington, DC.--Despite the flourishing U.S. economy and record low unemployment level, low-skilled jobs--such as the retail and leisure and hospitality industries--are in decline. These jobs will be further threatened by the prospect of a federal minimum wage hike, warns the Employment Policies Institute (EPI). Decades of economic research prove that raising the minimum wage reduces job opportunities, particularly for people with few skills. When faced with the increase in labor costs that attend minimum wage hikes, employers often respond by hiring more skilled applicants, automating jobs, or cutting back on customer service. Contrary to the opinion of proponents of minimum wage hikes, a rising tide doesn't necessarily lift all boats, and an extremely healthy skilled job market often masks an ailing low-skilled job market. ``The unintended consequences of a minimum wage hike will disproportionately affect low-skilled jobs while skilled labor may continue to flourish,'' said Jill Jenkins, EPI's chief economist. ``In other words, if two computer programmer jobs are created and one less grocery store checker is hired, the net job creation is positive, but you're still seeing a decline in entry-level job opportunities.'' A study by economists at the Federal Reserve found that every 10% increase in the minimum wage leads to a 2%-3% decrease in employment overall. When you focus on the job loss suffered by low-skilled individuals such as high school drop-outs or minority teens, the increase in unemployment is as high as 8.5% for every 10% increase in the minimum wage, according to research from Cornell and the University of Connecticut. ``Instead of pushing for a minimum wage increase, lawmakers could affect real change by promoting expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC),'' added Jenkins. ``The EITC effectively targets benefits to families in need without jeopardizing jobs.''

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate University Park Elementary School upon its receipt of the Department of Education's prestigious Blue Ribbon School Award. University Park Elementary School is among the first selected in the 2006 No Child Left Behind--Blue Ribbon Schools Program. It is among only 250 schools nationwide honored for either superior academic achievement or dramatic gains in student achievement. The Blue Ribbon Award is a testament to the hard work and dedication demonstrated by the students, parents, teachers, and administrators of University Park Elementary. This Award also recognizes the values that make the Highland Park Independent School District a beacon of academic excellence. It is my honor and privilege to recognize University Park Elementary School for its outstanding achievement in preparing our children for the challenges of tomorrow. May University Park Elementary School continue to be a shining example of superior leadership and commitment to excellence in education.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Dreier, I appreciate the opportunity for you to yield time to me. Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit shocked and surprised with the reformers that have come to Congress, the brand-new Democrats who are talking about all these things that they are going to get done. Yet it seems to me that with the respect we would have for the voters who sent us here, that we would not be asked to approve and get ready to vote on things without even seeing the bills. The new Democrat party, in their openness and trying to do things right, is asking Members of this body to vote for and approve getting rules to the floor without even knowing what the bills are about, the substance. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this. I rise in opposition because I think it is a step backwards, not a step forwards. It represents less transparency and is a slap in the face for regular order to this House. Section 503 of this flawed package rolls back the Sunlight reforms implemented by the Republican Party in 1995, and it creates a secret ballot in the Rules Committee for votes that are taken right upstairs, Mr. Speaker, where we would meet, where rules, as they are debated and brought before this House, Members always had to make sure that the votes that they were going to support would be recorded. That is not going to happen. There is no compelling reason for this bait-and-switch that has happened now by the new Democrats. Mr. Speaker, I oppose this. I think it is a step backwards, and it is my hope that the newest Members of this body will listen to what is being said, that their rhetoric about the openness and change in this body is simply a step backwards. What a shame. They thought they were coming to Washington to change things, and what they are doing is to make it more like central government that we are told what to do by a few people in the Democrat leadership.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the exceptional career of Mark L. Lowery, Special Agent in Charge of the United States Secret Service Dallas Field Office. Special Agent Lowery began his career with the Secret Service in 1983 in the St. Louis Field Office, following a 6 year tenure with the St. Louis County Police Department. With the U.S. Secret Service, he served in the Washington Field Office, the Presidential Protection Division, Special Investigations and Security Division, and the Financial Crimes Division. Under the leadership of Special Agent Lowery, the Dallas Field Office tackled many complex issues plaguing the Dallas community including identity theft, counterfeiting of currency and cyber crimes. Special Agent Lowery's leadership in these cases was instrumental, leading to the successful arrest and prosecution of many criminals in the Dallas area. Special Agent Lowery has received numerous awards and commendations during his twenty-three year career, including the highest Secret Service award, the Medal of Valor in 1985. The legacy he leaves will speak loudly of the impact he made on our community and his peers and his devotion to the betterment of our community. His tenure at the U.S. Secret Service Dallas Field Office is marked by his dedication, work ethic and public service. I am grateful for Special Agent Lowery's service to our nation, and I wish him all the best on the occasion of his retirement.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the members of the Democratic Pacific Union. On the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II (August 14, 2005), the Democratic Pacific Union (DPU) was formally inaugurated in Taipei, Taiwan. The ceremony drew 76 dignitaries from 23 countries, including the presidents and vice presidents of Taiwan, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Palau. The Union's goal is to promote democracy and encourage contacts among its 28 member democracies. Taiwan Vice President Lu Hsiu-lien was elected Chair of the Union. Since its inception, the Union has established a Secretariat and published its first quarterly, planned regular regional meetings in the East and the West Pacific regions, initiated the Pacific Economic Advisory Group and the Pacific Congressional Caucus, and additionally established a training program for typhoon and flood disaster reduction. The DPU has offered scholarships to students of member states to study in Taiwan, planned a Pacific university network in Taiwan, and invited distinguished women to come to Taiwan to discuss women's issues in the Pacific region. Other initiatives have been introduced to promote democratic values and prosperity among member states. There is little question that the Democratic Pacific Union has achieved a great deal during its short history. Its goals of promoting and spreading democracy are laudable and complement with our values. We should encourage the leaders of the Democratic Pacific Union by endorsing their goals and objectives as well as learning from them. I am certain that the Union will attract more members and win even greater international recognition in the months and years ahead.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Chairman Barton allowing me time to speak on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise opposing this Dietary Supplemental and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act. The bill would replace the current system of adverse event reporting by medical professionals through the MedWatch Program with a mandatory system that would require manufacturers and retailers to keep records and to report to the FDA when they received reports of adverse events. The bill redirects complaints of adverse effects away from local health responders, health care professionals, to manufacturers and retailers and then to the FDA. Consumers who are injured should be directed to medical professionals trained to determine whether the condition is caused by ingredients in the supplement or by other factors, not by self-diagnosis. Secondly, this bill depends on those who may be responsible for types of drugs or drug supplements to report adverse effects to the FDA. Those guilty of violating the law are less likely to report adverse effects to the government and to follow the law. I think this is a bad bill. I hope that we reject it.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, here we are talking about the rule for Homeland Security, and yesterday, the Rules Committee had an opportunity to speak very plainly with the appropriators who were responsible for this Homeland Security appropriations bill. We spoke with them about several matters. One of them was about the air marine operation under the CBP, Customs and Border Protection. I would like for my colleagues to know, who have joined me and others in the effort to talk about the air interdiction program that we have about drugs that come into this country, that this bill provides $600 million for their border and air space protection. Secondly, we had an opportunity to talk about the fugitive operation teams that nationwide are gathered together under Customs and Border Protection to make sure that the apprehension of those people who are illegal aliens that are in our country here who are fugitives and who are dangerous are picked up and dealt with by our judicial system in this country. Over and over and over, the things that we have talked about that were necessary and needed throughout the years are contained with funding in this bill. I am very happy to say that I am proud of what this administration has done by listening to us, and perhaps more importantly, our appropriators, like Hal Rogers who brought this bill, who listened and who have done something about it. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, the rule before us today will provide for consideration of three measures of vital importance to our Nation: The conference report for Fiscal Year 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations bill, the Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 2006 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006. This rule will enable the House to consider these bills and complete this important work on behalf of the American people. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this rule and the underlying legislation. These three bills address some of our Nation's most pressing priorities. First, the Homeland Security Appropriations Conference Report funds our most important Federal programs aimed at securing the Nation against terrorist attacks. It provides $34.8 billion for the operations and activities of the Department of Homeland Security in fiscal year 2007, an increase of $2.3 billion over fiscal year 2006 and $2.7 billion above the President's request. The conference agreement aggressively addresses our most critical homeland security needs, including border and immigration security; nuclear detection; port, cargo and container security; transportation security; natural disaster preparedness and response; and support to State and local first responders. This legislation secures our homeland first and foremost by protecting our borders and revitalizing immigration enforcement, because border security is homeland security. It provides over $21 billion for border protection, immigration enforcement and related activities. It includes an increase of $2.1 billion over funding in 2006. This includes $5.2 billion for the Secure Border Initiative and additional funding to support technology, personnel and infrastructure to prevent terrorists and other criminals from exploiting our borders and immigration system. Among other security-enhancing measures, this funding includes $2.77 billion for Border Patrol, adding 1,500 new Border Patrol agents, for a total of 14,800. It includes $1.2 billion for border fencing, vehicle barriers, technology and infrastructure; $4.2 billion for immigration and customs enforcement; $1.38 billion for Immigration and Custody Enforcement custody operations, adding 6,700 detention beds, for a total of 27,500; and $28.2 million to assist State and local efforts to enforce immigration laws. This conference report also recognizes the need to enhance port, container and cargo security by providing the funds necessary to secure our ports and inbound cargo in order to prevent terrorists and criminals from exploiting the international commerce system. It supports our first responders by paying attention to the needs of high-threat areas, firefighters and emergency management. It supports ongoing efforts to enhance the current inventory of our Nation's critical infrastructures, develop secure communication systems with Federal, State and local entities, and it continues to work with the private sector to implement protective measures around the Nation's infrastructure. This agreement continues ongoing efforts to enhance security for all modes of transportation, including ports, rails and aviation with a focus on developing and installing next-generation technology to inspect cargo, baggage and passengers. And it supports traditional missions, such as drug interdiction, law enforcement, maritime safety and Presidential protection. Finally, this conference report provides for the necessary and appropriate oversight of the Department of Homeland Security. It fences off $1.6 billion from being spent until DHS meets certain planning and management requirements. Under these requirements, DHS must develop a comprehensive strategy and plan for port, cargo, container security, and for the Secure Border Initiative. Department of Homeland Security must also provide expenditure plans for the border security system, U.S.-VISIT, Federal Protective Service, business transformation for CIS, explosive detection systems in airports, Customs information technology systems, and overall better financial data throughout the department, and in particular, science and technology. Finally, the agreement directs the preparedness Directorate and FEMA to improve its capacities in communications, training and other capacity assessments, including management logistics, emergency housing, debris removal and victim registration. Second, this rule provides for consideration of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 as modified by the other body. The House version of this legislation passed the House on Wednesday by a vote of 253-168 and was sent to the other body. Today's legislation again provides congressional authorization for military commissions to try alien unlawful enemy combatants for war crimes committed before, on or after 9/11/2001. It amends the War Crimes Act to criminalize grave breaches of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, while fully satisfying U.S. treaty obligations. It also authorizes the establishment of military commissions to try alien unlawful enemy combatants, which is the legal term used to define international terrorists and those who aid and support them, for war crimes. While this new chapter is based upon the Code of Military Justice, it also creates an entirely new structure for these trials. These commissions will only be used to try alien terrorists for war crimes. Any U.S. citizen will be tried within the Federal United States judiciary. These alien terrorists acquitted of a war crime will still be detained as enemy combatants according to the principle in international law that there exists an undisputable right to keep the enemy from returning to the battlefield. Thus, an acquittal at a war crime trial will not result in terrorists being released. This legislation also provides for an independent certified military judge to preside over all proceedings. This agreement creates the process necessary to prosecute terrorists effectively and fairly, while also protecting American troops and intelligence agents fighting the global war on terror. I would like to thank Chairman Duncan Hunter and Chairman Sensenbrenner for all of their hard work in reaching an agreement with the other body that keeps Americans safe while observing the rule of law. Third, this rule provides for the consideration of legislation to give private property owners the ability to litigate cases in Federal court when local and State regulations deprive owners the use of their own land. Although this legislation already passed the House this week with the support of the majority of its Members, it did not achieve the support of the super majority needed to pass under the suspension of the rules. So, today, the House will once again have the opportunity to support this commonsense bill to ensure that property owners have the same access to Federal courts as other plaintiffs claiming a violation of their constitutional rights. It removes the judicial detour of forcing claimants raising solely Federal claims to first pursue their litigation in State court on the very same case and dramatically reduces the amount of time that property owners must spend in negotiation and litigation before takings claims that can be heard on their merits. I congratulate the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for all of his hard work in constructing and perfecting this legislation, and I look forward to supporting his efforts on the floor later this afternoon. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of this work product that the majority has brought to the floor today. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation that will keep Americans safer, uphold the rule of law and protect the private property rights of citizens. I encourage each of my colleagues to join me in supporting this rule and the three underlying bills. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1054 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, during the last few years, Members of Congress have spoken very plainly and openly to this administration about our thoughts and ideas and hopes and dreams, about how we can better protect not only this country and our borders but the rule of law, and this administration has been very open to hearing from Members of Congress about these thoughts and concerns. Our next speaker is a gentleman who has engaged the administration, has talked about how important border initiatives are, to make sure that not only are we secure on our border but to make sure that we deal effectively and carefully with people who have come to this country, to make sure that they are safe, to make sure that they are not harmed in that process. If they have broken the law, they will take the full measure of law as it is given, but that we do so in a compassionate way. Our next speaker is the chairman of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), and I yield to him such time as he may consume. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Our previous speaker has just hit on probably one of the most important aspects of freedom in America, and that is the right of a person to be able to own property, the ability that we have to have our house to be our castle. Yet as we talk about the issue, I would like to add my dimension to it. The bottom line is that we are engaged in this on behalf of people who own property, people who own property who have grown weary of having local government take their property without due compensation for the benefit of local government, and we are going to protect the private property owner. We believe private property rights are very important, and that is why we are getting engaged, because we have seen local communities do for their own best interest those things that they wanted to do by taking private property from a person. We believe it is a simple part of what the Constitution is about. We believe that private property rights are important. I do understand the argument, and it is related to a person who cannot fight government even in their own local community when that is what government wants to do. We are going to give a level playing field to those individuals because we believe that the individualist who owns his own property should have equal rights also, not just to be taken advantage of by local communities. Mr. Speaker, that is also in this rule. We support the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House and as the designee of the chairman of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1064 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this consent agreement providing for the consideration of a conference report for the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act. This port security bill, which has been agreed to now by the conference committee, came as a result of House action that was made on May 4 that passed this House 421-2. Mr. Speaker, I want you to know that there are four major provisions within this SAFE Act: number one, enhancing security at U.S. ports; number two, preventing threats from reaching the United States of America; number three, tracking and protecting containers en route to the United States; and, number four, establishing the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. Mr. Speaker, we have spent a lot of time in this House of Representatives speaking about and working with our counterparts in the United States Senate as well as the administration on better ways that we can enhance port security. This conference report which we bring tonight, the last night before we go to recess, is an important victory for the American people. It stands to continue the safeguard position that this great Nation expects not only of its government but expects from the House of Representatives. I am proud that we are able to bring this bill forward tonight. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Florida has pointed up not only the hard work that we have been doing on this bill, bipartisan work for a number of years, but also really about the effort or the direction, the direction that we are aiming at. And, in fact, under this SAFE Port Act of 2006, we are setting a timeline by which 100 percent of all containers will be scanned for radiation, by requiring the Department of Homeland Security to set the timeline for deploying these radiation detectors. Mr. Speaker, we are also making sure that we are adding the number of people to the Customs and Border Patrol who will conduct these validations. We are going to make sure that we continue to add, as necessary, the numbers of people pointed at the right direction. The gentleman from Florida is correct: we are not exactly where we want to be. But for us to think that 100 percent of everything can just be done overnight is not the reality of where the threat is at this country. I believe this President, I believe this administration, I believe this Congress have been aware of the frailties of our systems. We are trying to match our dollars, the resolve of this great Nation, with the ability on all of our borders to be able to make sure that we are looking at the threats of the 21st century that come to us as a result of terrorist organizations. We want to make sure that by doing this bill tonight that we allow and put into motion the opportunity for the Department of Homeland Security to be better prepared to face those threats that come against the United States. This passed 421-2. It is an indication, it was in May, that we are headed in the right direction. I am confident tonight that the final answer that comes from the negotiation with the Senate can be on the President's desk as early as tomorrow, ready and waiting to protect this country. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I came down to speak about the bill, the SAFE Port Act of 2006, and to move this bill forward. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida, my friend, who has engaged this entire year in attempting to work with us the best as possible, despite some objections, on getting these bills to the floor. The Rules Committee does have a job to do. That is our job tonight. Our job is to make sure that this rule is brought forward. I am asking all Members to vote ``aye'' on the previous question, to vote ``aye'' and then to get this bill on the floor with an overwhelming bipartisan vote, 421-2 the last time we voted on this bill. It is the right thing. It makes sure that we provide the tools that are necessary to the President of the United States effective immediately. I think we are going to get it done, Mr. Speaker. I am very proud of the work that is happening in the U.S. House of Representatives. I am proud to know that tonight we will be through, we will be home, we will be with our families, but we should not leave until we get our work done, and that we are doing.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank all the gentlemen and ladies who are here on the floor tonight talking about the Wright amendment, that we are going to pass this amendment tonight. But to answer the gentleman's question from Michigan, the reason why this is a pro-consumer bill is that effective immediately, when the President signs this, every single person that takes off from Love Field will be able to ticket through wherever they want to go. Today, they have to ticket through to an adjacent State that is close to them, they have to get off the airplane, they have to get their bags, and they have to reticket through. This is a pro-consumer bill. This is the right thing to do. We have come together as a delegation. I am asking for all the Members of the United States Congress to please support the bipartisan attempt between the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, between the airlines to do something favorable for consumers tonight. Our majority leader, John Boehner, was aware of this issue. It has been a continuing, simmering, boiling issue for the Texas delegation. We have asked that it be brought here. I am asking for everybody's vote. Vote tonight ``aye.''

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 10th anniversary of Fox News Channel, which in celebration will present live audience shows from various locations across the country, including a live broadcast on September 22, 2006 from Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas. Fox News Channel brings fair and balanced reporting to a national audience, and I am proud that they chose to broadcast live from one of Texas' and the Nation's premier institutions of higher learning, Southern Methodist University. I would like to take this opportunity to express special recognition to Fox News Channel on the occasion of its 10th anniversary.