E. Shaw

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise again today to protest the unfair allocation of urban area security funding by the city of Miami. Miami is unfairly withholding the essential funds that my district needs to improve antiterrorism measures. The city of Miami wants to keep the lion's share of the urban area security funding and to buy a helicopter, a helicopter, when Broward is receiving an embarrassing 10 percent of the money and Palm Beach County is receiving zero dollars. It is ridiculous for Miami to be buying a helicopter with tax dollars of hard-working Americans. That is just plain egregious. All Broward and Palm Beach counties want is a fair share of what we need to protect our citizens against a terrorist attack. One month after the 9/11 attack, anthrax was used to kill Robert Stevens, a 63-year-old photo editor in Palm Beach. And it is well known that the 9/11 terrorists made south Florida their base of operation. How much more evidence do we need to prove that Broward and Palm Beach counties are at risk and that we need some Federal assistance to help us address these very real threats. The city of Miami cannot be trusted to spend in money on behalf of the region. President Bush, Secretary Ridge, Attorney General Ashcroft, Governor Bush, on down to the American taxpayers ought to be livid at what is going on. I know I am and so are my constituents.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today for the fifth time to speak in protest of the unfair allocation of Urban Area Security Initiative grants from the Department of Homeland Security. Broward and Palm Beach Counties in my district have not received nearly enough, no, not nearly enough, of the funding they need to keep our families and our communities safe from terrorist threats. Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a warning in south Florida on July 1 that the terrorists behind the deadly assaults on September 11 are between 75 and 90 percent complete with their plans for a major attack against the United States this year. Mr. Speaker, our region with its ports, airports and millions of visitors cannot be ruled out as a possible target or terrorist base of operation. In my district we are very much aware of the area's vulnerability. We are at a high level of intensity in south Florida. Broward County and Palm Beach County must be designated as its own urban area so that we can receive the funding we need to enhance the security measures that will protect our families, our communities and critical infrastructure. The City of Miami cannot be trusted to allocate these funds.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise in protest once again in regard to the unfair allocation of Urban Area Security Initiative grants from the Department of Homeland Security by the city of Miami. Broward County in my district has not received nearly enough, not nearly enough, for the funding it needs to keep our critical infrastructure safe from terrorist attacks. On Sunday, a man crashed his SUV into a crowded terminal building at the Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Broward County. He drove it all the way through two walls to the ticket counter. Airport officials were very quick to say, and correctly so, that the crash was not a terrorist act. But it could have been. Let us not forget that this area was home to the al Qaeda operatives prior to 9/11. Airport security was tight for the holiday weekend, but there were no security measures in place and no physical structures that could have stopped this man from killing or injuring hundreds of travelers in the terminal. Having metal posts along the sidewalks would have made it impossible for this man to drive his SUV into the terminal. Instead, the crash caused $100,000 worth of damage and threatened the safety of hundreds of holiday travelers. Mr. Speaker, both Broward and Palm Beach Counties are vulnerable targets. This is just one more reason why my district should be designated as its own urban area so that we can improve security measures that will protect our communities.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, this is the third day in a row that I have come to the floor to speak in protest of the unfair practice by the City of Miami in allocating Federal urban security money to Broward and Palm Beach Counties. Of the $30 million allocated to the south Florida urban area, zero dollars, zero, have been assigned to Palm Beach County. For the City of Miami to neglect providing the necessary funding for this county is simply outrageous, in that they have kept 90 percent of these funds for themselves. Palm Beach County is home to 1.2 million people, and it has a large and very busy international airport, as well as three general aviation airfields. The port of Palm Beach is the fourth busiest container port in Florida and the 18th busiest in the continental United States, making it an attractive target for would-be terrorists. Mr. Speaker, the hijackers of September 11 spent part of their time in south Florida, and Palm Beach was the site of an anthrax attack, killing one person and injuring many more; and, yet, Palm Beach County is not getting one dime in antiterrorist funds. This is outrageous, Mr. Speaker, and I am asking Homeland Security to designate Broward and Palm Beach Counties as its own region under the Urban Area Security Initiative Program so that we can be eligible to receive the necessary funds we must protect our infrastructure, our community and our residents.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the Urban Area Security Initiative grants. The Department of Homeland Security awards these grants to urban areas based on credible threat information, population density, and critical infrastructure. Broward County, which is in my district, has been designated an embarrassing and unacceptable 10 percent of this homeland security money by the city of Miami who has kept the rest. Mr. Speaker, Broward County is the home of 1.6 million people. It also houses Port Everglades, which is home to 19 cruise lines. It also houses a large petroleum tank farm, which is the sole provider of fuel for 12 south Florida counties, including Miami Dade. The port ploys 10,000 people and generates $1.7 billion in business activity and $545 million in wage annually. Broward also has an international airport, which is located within close proximity of both Port Everglades and the petroleum tank farm. Broward County remains an extremely vulnerable terrorist target, and it must be treated as such. So I am here to voice my unwavering support for the Department of Homeland Security to create a new urban area for Broward, as well as Palm Beach County. This is my second consecutive day to come to the floor about this issue. I am speaking for my constituents and will continue to do so until this outrageous offense by the city of Miami is corrected.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to protest the unfair practice by the City of Miami, Florida, in allocating Federal urban area security money to Broward, Palm Beach, and Monroe Counties. Under the current definition, Broward and Palm Beach and Monroe are integral partners with Miami and Miami-Dade County in protecting south Florida's over 5 million residents. However, in the over $30 million allocated to the south Florida urban area, only 10 percent was assigned to Broward County and zero dollars to Palm Beach and Monroe Counties, and, in fact, the other municipalities in Dade County. Mr. Speaker, to neglect the necessary funding these other three counties deserve is simply outrageous. Both Palm Beach and Broward Counties have an international airport, seaport, and critical petroleum reserves. Let us not forget, Mr. Speaker, that this area was the home to al-Qaeda operatives prior to 9/11. So I am here today to voice my unwavering support for the Department of Homeland Security, to create a new urban area for Palm Beach and Broward Counties. I am speaking for my constituents and will continue to do so until this outrageous offense is resolved.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Marion Broadhead and her work as a member of the Sterling McClellan Post 142 of the American Legion Auxiliary. This organization, which is dedicated to humanitarian programs for veterans, young people, and the community, has a strong team of women working together for the betterment of citizens lives. Recently the Sterling McClellan Post 142 of Pompano Beach, Florida, honored Ms. Broadhead as their five-time president, and current chaplain with the Unit Member of the Year Award. Ms. Broadhead was honored at an annual Memorial Day Parade and Picnic in Pompano Beach. Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, along with members of the community and some surviving veterans, joined in this celebration. Ms. Broadhead has led in the effort of community service by volunteering weekly in South Florida. Broadhead, who is a breast cancer survivor, spends her days visiting North Broward Medical Center, Trinity Community Church, St. Lawrence Chapel, and the Veterans Hospital in Miami. Mr. Speaker, the benevolent and generous spirit that Ms. Marion Broadhead, in combination with the Sterling McClellan Post 142, has shown to the communities of South Florida is one that I would like to celebrate. Individuals like Ms. Broadhead help in building unified and strong communities in America.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) for yielding me this time this morning. In 1996, this House embarked, I think, upon a huge social experiment. We, for the first time in decades, had changed the way or moved away, from the policy of rewarding people not to work, to have kids and not to marry. We changed the world; and as a result of that bill, and I remember it so well, we passed it three times out of here and it was vetoed twice by President Clinton, but on the third time, much to his credit, he came on television, right before the vote, I was watching it in the cloak room, and announced that he was going to sign the bill. As a result, we got good bipartisan support, and that was tremendously important; and it was important because it was a situation and it set the record really straight as far as the Congress of what we were trying to do which is to help people out of poverty, to help people take control of their lives, take control of their families, not to be dependent on some huge massive welfare that was suffocating them. We found there were people living in neighborhoods where nobody in the entire neighborhood worked, and the only people that they would ever see that were making a dollar were out in the street selling drugs. We have changed that. This social experiment has been, I think, one of the greatest steps forward since I have been in the Congress; and I am very, very proud to have been a part of it. But the real champion of welfare reform has been the welfare mothers, those that get up in the morning, get their kids dressed and ready for school, see them off to school or take them to school, then go to work and then reverse that process in the afternoon to pick them up from child care and bring them home, take care of them, fix their meals, do their homework, and then start it all over again the next day. These are the champions of welfare. Yet, in February of 2003, this House, with a heavy Republican vote and 11 Democrats joining with us, put a long-term extension of welfare reform into place. We are now waiting and waiting and waiting for the Senate to take action on this particular bill, and it is frustrating. We have had now five or six extensions, short-term extensions, and we are not getting to the meat of the nut, and that is that we need to set this in law permanently. But this is something Congress should be very proud of. Both political parties should be very proud of what we have done and what we have accomplished. We have given these people a life. We have given them a life. And this is tremendously important. There were so many back then, when we passed welfare reform, that said we were going to have kids sleeping on the grates. They are not. We have taken over 2 million kids out of poverty. We have cut the rolls in half and people are working. For once, these welfare moms are now role models for their kids. They have shown that with our just having a little bit of faith in the human spirit, they can become a family and they can become a role model for their kids. We heard this in testimony before the Subcommittee on Human Resources that I once chaired. So I certainly support this short-term extension until September. I wish we were here working on a conference report back from the Senate, but that is not to be. And because of their rules, they have got this thing bottled up over there. But I would hope that we could get this thing moving and that we could get it back here on the floor. We were very, very careful, and have all through this entire debate been very, very careful to be sure that we have child care in place, that we do not take away the Medicaid that is so important to so many of these people, and other benefits that we hold up so that these people do not have to have a fear of coming off of welfare and going to work.

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), that in March, reading from the gentleman's own statement, he says, ``You have stonewalled. It is not the Senate. They are now moving ahead.'' They are moving ahead? You asked for bipartisan support. You asked for working together. We do not write the bills in the Senate. Let them write the bill, pass a bill, send it back, and we will get it into conference. What is everyone afraid of?

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SHAW. What is it the gentleman has a problem with? And then be very specific. We put $4 billion additional in child care. I know he is for that. We have full TANF funding for the next 5 years. He should be in favor of that. Supplemental grants. Contingency funds for States with increased need.

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I would have to revise the memory of the other side. We wanted to work with the Democrats all through this process of writing this bill. The gentleman from Michigan was very much involved in that at that time. They chose not to. In committee they voted against the bill, even the one that eventually passed. When it came to the floor, they voted against the bill, even the one that eventually passed. It was not until we got to the conference and the President put his force behind this bill that they came aboard. I do not know where all of this bipartisan stuff came from, but it certainly did not come out of the committee. I think we need to be straight on history here. The Republicans led the way on welfare reform. Period. Even though the President signed it on August 22, 1996, much to his credit. I will give him credit, also, as being very, very forward looking when he was Governor of the State of Arkansas, but then he retreated under the pressure of the Democrat leadership here in the House; and it was not until right before the election in August that he finally conceded that he would sign the bill, and we sent it to him, and he had a big ceremony and everybody was there and everybody took credit for it.

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Michigan, I did not misstate it. I gave President Clinton full credit. As Governor Clinton he was ahead of his time. But he pulled back as soon as he got here. Something happens to folks when they come here to Washington. We get good Democrat Governors from the South, they come up here and all of a sudden they cave to their majority leaders here in the House of Representatives. It is a fact of life. That is exactly what happened. But I do give Governor Clinton a lot of credit. And then finally in 1996, August of 1996, I give him credit for having signed the bill. I have been very careful to do that. We looked to the Governors for flexibility. We looked to the Governors for leadership. They were on the front line of welfare reform long before the Federal Government came along. We learned a lot from the Governors throughout this country, Democrat and Republican, including my own Governor Chiles, we worked with him, Engler, a bunch of them. We had some wonderful Governors that we worked with, we talked to, and we went to for advice. It was up to them to run these programs, and we wanted to be sure that we were sending something to them that was quite doable.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 20th anniversary of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), which was established by the passage of the Missing Children's Assistance Act of 1984. I am proud to have been an original cosponsor of this legislation. It was my honor to act on behalf of my constituents, John and Reve Walsh, who became effective advocates on behalf of missing children's issues after the abduction and murder of their son, Adam, in 1981. John and Reve's hard work and determination helped to create NCMEC, which now serves as the national clearinghouse for information on missing children and the prevention of child victimization. It was under the strong and distinguished leadership of the late President Ronald Reagan that the NCMEC was established. On June 13, 1984, President Reagan officially opened the NCMEC in a ceremony at the White House. The President challenged the NCMEC to wake up America and attack the crisis of child abduction. At the time, there was little coordination between the 50 states and the 18,000 law-enforcement agencies. President Reagan encouraged the development of the NCMEC as an institution that could combine the benefits of both the public and private sectors to achieve its goals. The NCMEC has significantly improved and advanced the coordination of investigation efforts to recover abducted children on the national level in a manner that could not have been accomplished in its absence. The clear effectiveness of this program is evidenced by the remarkable recovery rate of children under this program. In 2004, the NCMEC reported that more than 94 percent of the children reported missing in that year were recovered. Furthermore, the highly publicized AMBER alert program serves as a national tool to create public awareness of abductions and possible threats. Such determined efforts serve an invaluable service to our country in staving off some of the most serious and concerning threats to our Nation's children. Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere belief that the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children cultivates a culture in this country that appreciates the safety of its children and establishes direct means at recovering children who fall victim to the threats of the people who disregard the laws of basic humanity. It was my honor in supporting the creation of this institution, just as it's my honor to continue to support this program that has had such a positive affect on our Nation. As a member of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, I will continue working to provide and sustain high levels of support for our law-enforcement agencies in their quest to safely retrieve victims of child abduction.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I come to the floor today to speak to the problems that we are having in south Florida with regard to the allocation of the anti-terrorism aid that is supposed to flow into our part of the State of Florida. We are in one area with Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade and Monroe County. The United States Department of Homeland Security put the City of Miami in charge of dividing this money earmarked to help metropolitan areas viewed as the highest risk for attack. Miami was designated a high-risk area because of its downtown, airport, seaport and large population, but it was required under the grant to coordinate how this money is spent over the entire area. As a result, the City of Miami retained 90 percent of the money and has allowed approximately 10 percent to come to Broward, has given Monroe County nothing, and has given Palm Beach County nothing. Let us take a look at this. Miami was designated because of the downtown area. Palm Beach, West Palm Beach is a large metropolitan area. So is Fort Lauderdale. Both Broward and Palm Beach County have airports, several airports, and both have seaports. And the Port Everglades, which is in Broward County, supplies all of the petroleum for south Florida, including the Miami airport, including all of the automobiles that run throughout Miami-Dade County and that part of the area, and is very vulnerable. And there is a seaport in Palm Beach County. Speaking of large populations, the combined population of Broward and Palm Beach County is larger than Miami-Dade County. Something has to be done here. The Department of Homeland Security has clearly, in my opinion, been betrayed by the City of Miami. So Palm Beach and Broward County are speaking with one voice and asking to separate themselves from Miami- Dade. This could not be done if we are limited to the status quo in the number of metropolitan areas that we presently have as one of the amendments that we will soon be voting on does provide for. I would ask that we not strap ourselves into that single position. The only response that we get from there, and I am quoting from the Sun Sentinel newspaper, it says, ``The politics involved here are directly detracting from putting these Federal dollars to use to reduce the risk, and that is a shame,'' and that comment was made by a fellow named Joe Fernandez, who is a Miami assistant fire chief in that area. This is not politics, this is an absolute outrage. So again, Palm Beach County, Broward County, we want to separate ourselves from Miami and Miami-Dade County because of the outrageous manner in which this money has been hoarded and held onto by the City of Miami. Amendment No. 22 Offered by Mr. Turner of Texas

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time to speak in strong favor of this most important bill. We have heard so much. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), while very eloquent, was missing the point. The point is this bill does create jobs and the louder one talks does not change that fact. We have been running corporations offshore in this country because of our tax bills. One has to look no further than Chrysler leaving the United States, one of the Big Three going to Germany because they got a better deal. That is what jobs are: companies and people. Employers create jobs, not the United States Congress. But the United States Congress for years has been taking jobs away and running jobs offshore because of higher taxes and more regulation and then coming to the floor and complaining about the jobs leaving. But I want to speak about one other part of this bill which is very important. If you are from Nevada, if you are from Texas, if you are from Florida and some other States, this bill has something that is so long in coming, something that we have been working for for so many years; and that part of this bill is for the first time in about 20 years, the American public is going to be able to deduct its sales tax from its taxable income here in this country. This is huge. If you are from Florida you better think about this. If you vote against the deductibility of sales tax, you are voting against the taxpayers of Florida, Texas, Nevada, Ohio, and other States. We do not have an income tax in Florida to deduct from taxable income tax. So Florida does not get to deduct anything. This is pure fairness. I am proud that it is part of this bill.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the City of Oakland Park, Florida as its residents celebrate their city's 75th birthday. Originally named Floranada, Oakland Park was incorporated with its current name in June of 1929. The official census of the time reported the budding town's population at only 562 residents. In those days, the town was so eager for growth that one could get a free lot in Oakland Park just by buying a 30-day subscription to Miami Movie Magazine; it was thought that the town would soon become a home for all the stars of the ``Motion Pictures.'' While the city has grown up a lot since the 20's, now boasting a population of over 30,000 residents, small town values have always been a fundamental part of living in Oakland Park. As late as the 1950's and 60's, residents always left their keys in the ignition, and only locked their houses during hurricanes to keep the doors from blowing off. Even today, though these practices do not persist, the values they embody make Oakland Park a great place to live and work. This is perhaps owing to the many community related programs and activities the residents of Oakland Park have organized, all of which have grown and evolved along with the city. For example, the Oakland Park Recreation Center opened its doors in 1960 with only two part time employees supervising children's activities. Today, the center maintains a staff of over 50, who are in charge of overseeing the care and maintenance of all parks and athletic complexes. Beyond activities for children, citizens can now partake in a wide variety of activities, from youth T- ball, to adult tennis, to ceramics for seniors. Today, Oakland Park continues to grow and thrive. Recently the city embarked on a $19 million facelift plan to be completed in 2008. The redevelopment is designed to further the friendly ``small town'' atmosphere that has always belonged to Oakland Park. The primary goal of the plan is to compliment Oakland Park's already safe and attractive neighborhoods and good schools with all of the social, cultural, and business opportunities of a city. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent the City of Oakland Park in the U.S. House of Representatives, and extend my best wishes to the Mayor, Commissioners, and residents of Oakland Park as they celebrate their first 75 years.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of the House the achievements of Patrick Rooney, Sr., a constituent of mine from Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, in receiving the prestigious 2004 Providencia Award from the Palm Beach County Convention and Visitors Bureau. May 2004, being National Tourism Month, is the perfect time to honor Pat, who owns and operates the Palm Beach Kennel Club in West Palm Beach and three Irish restaurants called ``Rooney's Public House'' located at the Palm Beach International Airport, West Palm Beach and Jupiter's Abacoa. I am a patron of those restaurants and can testify to the quality of food and service and to the vibrancy they bring to the surrounding communities. The Providencia Award was named after the coconut-laden Spanish ship that sank off the shore of Palm Beach in 1878, washing ashore its cargo bringing Coconut Palms to the island and inspiring the name ``Palm Beach.'' Each year, it is awarded to an individual or entity that has made an exceptional contribution to the County's $2 billion tourism industry. Past recipients include Burt Reynolds, Chris Evert, Jack Nicklaus, Alex Dreyfoos, The Breakers, The Boca Raton Resort and others. This year it belongs to Pat Rooney, who is being honored for his contributions. Mr. Speaker, in my South Florida Congressional District, home of fervent Miami Dolphin fans, we forgive and overlook Pat's strong allegiance to the Pittsburgh Steelers, which his family owns. We focus rather on the tremendous impact Pat has on our community. Pat serves on the Economic Council, and the Palm Beach County Attractions Association. The Hanley Hazelden Foundation, Boys and Girls Club of Palm Beach, Greyhound Adoption League, Lynn University, and the American Red Cross have also benefitted from his generous philanthropy. Mr. Speaker, congratulations to Mac McLaughlin and his team for selecting another great honoree this year. To Pat Rooney, congratulations on this important recognition and I wish you good health and continued success, except when it comes to the AFC Conference Championship.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I have to address the previous speaker regarding the price of energy and the shortage of energy that is claimed throughout the world. I think it is important that all of us realize that for the gentleman from Massachusetts, the candidate for President of the United States in the other party, to go and complain about fuel prices is like the kids that kill their parents and then claim that they are orphans and should be given special treatment. That is absolutely absurd. When the Senate blocked the energy bill, it blocked the administration's plan to have an energy bill, an energy bill for this country. It is time that we stop the rhetoric, we stop the bipartisan quibbling. Republicans and Democrats are paying too much for fuel. We need an energy policy in this country, and the first step was the energy bill that stalled over in the other body. It is time for us to work together to solve problems instead of just creating them.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the men and women of the United States armed services currently serving in the theaters of Afghanistan and Iraq. These men and women, from a diverse, cross- section of America perform their duties with pride and deep patriotism. Our solders remain committed to fulfilling a democratic Iraq where men, women and children can freely live without fear of a dictatorial regime and the suppression of individual freedoms. The successes that liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban and Iraq from Saddam Hussein resulted from the commitment, skill and expertise our solders displayed on the battlefield. Mr. Speaker, I recently spoke to Sargent S.J. Teske of Boca Raton. Sgt. Teske is a member of the U.S. Marine Corps and has recently been deployed to the Iraq region. Following my conversation, I was presented with a letter written by this brave American. I ask unanimous consent to include Sgt. Teske's letter in to the Congressional Record. May God bless Sgt. Teske and the men and women of our armed forces. A Letter From One of Our Troops April 5, 2004. To Whom It May Concern: This afternoon I received a phone call from my brother requesting me to write a letter about how I felt about being deployed to Iraq. A relatively easy task to which I replied, ``No problem, you will have it tonight.'' I debated as to whether I should give a generic, political or military answer or one that came from my heart. Needless to say, last night came and went. I lay in bed looking at my fiance fast asleep and our darling 1 year old lab curled up next to me, thinking about the weeks that lie ahead and how few I have left prior to my departure. Visions of the good-byes I would soon have to make to my parents, brothers, sisters, fiance and friends ran through my mind and my eyes quickly swelled with tears. I thought about my 10 year high school reunion that I would miss in November, Christmas, birthdays, my best friend's wedding, dropping out of school, taking a $30,000 salary cut and how my fiance and family would have to take on so many responsibilities. Then the thoughts about why I had joined the Marine Corps 9.5 years ago came to mind, the blood, sweat, tears and pain throughout those years I put my body through to become one of ``The Few''. As my mind recaptured all of these memories and the soon approaching anxieties I decided that this is my answer to that question: I feel that it is my responsibility to deploy to Iraq and partake in Operation Iraqi Freedom, not just as a responsibility to my troops and the Marine Corps, but to our Country. Freedom is not free. The fatigues I wear do not represent the United States Marine Corps; they represent all who have given their lives before me so I could have the opportunity to wear them. I belong to a brotherhood of individuals who are willing to sacrifice the most priceless gift, so others can know how amazing the meaning of Freedom really is. It is a responsibility and an obligation to a commitment made so many years ago that I still today continue to choose to be apart of. I find pleasure in the simple things in life and the things you cannot buy or put a price tag on, it is these things we most often take for granted, and the cost of maintaining and defending them is Freedom-- this is my job and my motivation. I certainly don't benefit from monetary remunerations, our accommodations most often are made of the ground we walk on and the MREs we eat would not be considered as edible staples by most people's standards. The luxury of a shower or a cold glass of water are things that are most often, taken for granted, still I believe that our rewards are much greater. When I see innocent children laughing on their way to school, not worrying about the brutalities of war, destruction or hatred, my heart smiles. Sunday mornings sitting in the pew at church I understand what the definition of Freedom really is. Our Flag flying so proudly above every building stands for everything we are defending. To have the opportunity to continue my education, have a career, a home, vehicles and a family--that ``wows'' me. Our country is so spectacular, so beautiful, so amazing, so incredible and so untainted compared to that of not only my destination, but also so many others. I am proud to be a part of a mission that will make a difference not only in our generation, but our world. I have Faith that we will endure, and we will succeed in this war on terror. For me, there is an Honor and Pride that goes along with that. I find strength in knowing that I am a part of an organization that is determined to end terrorism and overwhelmed with the confidence within us that we will succeed. Our Nation or any other Nation should never again have to feel the agony we felt on September 11th. I believe in God, our Marine Corps and our Country. Conclusively, what I feel about being deployed to Iraq and the sacrifices that will go along with it, is that I am proud to defend a Flag whose colors will never run, a military that will never falter and proud to serve such an amazing Nation. God Bless America and Semper Fidelis.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I can see both sides of pay-go, but I cannot see both sides of delegating legislative authority to the executive branch no matter who controls the executive branch.

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I took particular interest in listening to the gentleman from Washington when he said how the Democrats in 1993 dug us out of a hole. I would have to remind the gentleman that his party was running the Congress for decades before that. There is not one dollar that this government spends that is not directly appropriated or approved by this House, right here, where revenue and spending bills must start and end. So I would suggest that he take a lesson in constitutional law and check his history when he starts doing this. Then he says how they claim to have dug us out, with the largest tax increase in history. That is the way we balanced the budget. That is a fact of history. I think we should certainly take notice of that. As the gentleman from Wisconsin correctly pointed out, these tax decreases that we have on the books right now, one of which we are talking about sunsetting now, that we want to erase the sunset on, has been the economic stimulus that has been the engine that has led to this great recovery. We were headed towards perhaps what would have been a very deep recession and if it were not for the Bush tax cuts, we would have bottomed out and still be struggling at the bottom of the hole that he is referring to. What have the tax decreases done? These tax cuts have given economic stimulus that has increased employment in this country. The unemployment rate has dropped tremendously, far beyond the expectations, I think, of either political party. What has done this? Economic growth has done this. To raise taxes or allow them to go up is trying to say that a store that is charging too much for goods is going to get more revenue by increasing the cost of its products. That does not happen. You slow down sales. When we increase taxes, or allow them to increase, economic growth is stifled. Unemployment goes up, economic growth is slowed, and this is a fact of life. What we need to do is to be sure that we do not go back to the lower rate at the 15 percent level, that we get rid of the sunset provision and provide that this 10 percent bracket is going to remain in effect. This is tremendously important. It affects so many millions of taxpayers in my own State of Florida and it has a great economic effect in all the congressional districts. I urge the passage of this resolution.

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I want to point out something in the substitute which I am not sure has really been brought to the attention or brought to rise here in this particular debate, and that is on the fourth page of the substitute. I will read starting at line 3: ``Congress meets the requirements of this subsection,'' and that it is talking about the deduction, ``if before September 1, 2010, Congress has enacted comprehensive Federal budget legislation; and, 2, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget certifies in September of 2010 that such legislation will result in a balanced Federal budget by fiscal year 2014, determined by taking into account the cost of the foregoing provisions of this Act and without taking into account the receipts and disbursements of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds.'' And then B, ``will permit the general fund of the Treasury to repay amounts previously borrowed from Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds without requiring large Federal foreign Central Bank purchases.'' Now, I am not sure exactly what they are getting to on this, but if they think that the Congress is going to have to pay back all of the money that it has borrowed from Social Security and put cash into that particular fund, in other words, by putting cash in the Social Security fund in place of the Treasury bills, I do not know where in the world they think they are going to get that much money. And they also are going to have to change the law regarding Social Security, because Social Security is required to pay that cash into the general fund and to replace it with Treasury bills, and this particular legislation does not change that provision. But most of all, and I think the most damaging thing here which this Congress should be very jealously protecting, and that is the legislative authority under the Constitution given to this particular body. If this bill were passed, and if Members vote for this bill, they are saying the Office of Management and Budget is going to be the crossing guard that is going to prevent legislation going forward unless they say it is fine and they can certify that the budget is going to be balanced. A balanced budget is a good thing, but delegating legislative authority to unelected officials, bureaucrats within the Federal Government, is a huge mistake, and it is something that we should do in a bipartisan way, and that is jealously guard what our responsibility is under the Constitution. I do not know of any other place that we have delegated such authority.

Mr. SHAW

Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor one of south Florida's most beloved treasures and one of our Nation's most outspoken advocates on behalf of higher education, Sister Jeanne O'Laughlin, retiring President of Barry University. When Sister Jeanne became President in 1981, Barry University was a struggling college of 2,000 students. Since then, she has raised over $170 million and has transformed Barry into a thriving university, serving more than 8,500 students. But for the record, Sister Jeanne impacted much on my life and I want to recognize it here today. Mr. Speaker, Sister Jeanne and I are both lung cancer survivors. Having gone through diagnosis and treatment before me, sister Jeanne's model of resolve and optimism has brought me through some of my darkest days. Today I thank Sister Jeanne O'Laughlin for her many gifts to south Florida over the years and for her personal gift to me at my time of crisis. Mr. Speaker, we look forward to many wonderful things to come from Sister Jeanne as she moves to the next phase of her unending quest to make the world a smarter and more loving place for all of us.