Ike Skelton

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this means to recognize Dorothy Bryant from my hometown of Lexington, Missouri. Mrs. Bryant will be retiring at the end of this year after thirty years of dedicated service to the Lafayette County Sheriffs Department. Mrs. Bryant began working for the Sheriffs Department on January 21, 1980, and since then has worked for five different Sheriffs of Lafayette County. She has worked for the current Sheriff, Kerrick Alumbaugh, for nine of her thirty years. A loyal and dedicated employee, Mrs. Bryant has worked tirelessly to serve the residents of Lafayette County. Madam Speaker, Dorothy Bryant has helped keep the people of Lafayette County safe for the past three decades. I trust that my fellow members of the House will join me in wishing her the very best in her well- earned retirement.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, it is with sadness that I inform the House of the death of my dear friend Lieutenant Colonel George Withers Stier of Lexington, Missouri. Stier was born in December of 1919 to Earle Taggart Stier and Grace King Stier. After graduating from Wentworth Military Academy with ROTC training, he volunteered for the Army Reserves and applied for Active Duty in 1941. During World War II, Stier showed his unyielding courage and love of country while flying the B-17 Flying Fortress. During the last of his 16 bombing missions over Germany, he and his crew were shot down and became prisoners of war at Stalag Luft III. Surviving a 50-mile forced march, Stier and his fellow airmen spent over a year as prisoners of war. On April 20, 1945, he was liberated by General George Patton and his 3rd Army's 14th Tank Battalion. In 1948, Stier married his lovely wife Kathleen Miller Trumbull. The two returned to his hometown of Lexington, Missouri, where they operated Stier's Clothing Store, a family operation since 1906. A dedicated public servant, he served on the City Council and was president of the local Chamber of Commerce. He maintained his connection to Wentworth Military Academy by teaching business courses to our future servicemen and women. Preceded in death by his wife Kathleen who sadly passed away in 2004, he is survived by his children, Sheila and George. Madam Speaker, Lt. Col. George Stier was a courageous airman, a loving husband and father, and a dear friend. I trust that my fellow Members of the House will join me in extending their heartfelt condolences to his two children, family, and friends.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, today, the House of Representatives is considering H.R. 3288, the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010. This legislation contains six of the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills that have not yet been signed into law by the President. I commend my colleagues for gluing together this very complex measure that invests in important American priorities. I support a vast majority of this legislation, especially funds that have been directed toward veterans health care, military construction, public safety, health research, education, highways, and international diplomacy. But, I am terribly concerned about other aspects of the bill, namely its $1.1 trillion price tag as well as provisions that would allow federal funds to be used for needle exchange programs and for abortion services in the District of Columbia. While I cannot lend my support to H.R. 3288, I remain committed to working with my Democratic and Republican colleagues as we finish the fiscal year 2010 appropriations process and begin work on the bills for next year.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, today the House of Representatives is considering H.R. 4213, the Tax Extenders Act of 2009. I wish to express my support for this legislation, which would continue a number of expiring provisions of the U.S. tax code that are important to the people and businesses I am privileged to represent in rural Missouri. Without Congressional action, these tax cuts will expire on December 31st. For Missouri families, H.R. 4213 would provide important tax relief. The measure would extend deductions for state and local sales and property taxes and for college tuition. It would extend a special deduction for teachers and other school professionals who use personal funds to buy school supplies for their classrooms. And, the legislation would take steps to ensure activated military reservists do not suffer a pay reduction by providing a tax credit for small businesses that continue to pay National Guard and Reserve employees when they are called to active duty. For Missouri farmers, H.R. 4213 would extend the five-year depreciation for farming machinery and equipment, would extend the charitable tax deduction for donated food, and would extend the tax deduction for donating conservation easements. H.R. 4213 would also extend critical tax incentives for biodiesel and renewable diesel fuel. The biodiesel tax credit is very important to the development and sustainability of America's renewable fuel industry and is particularly beneficial to biodiesel facilities, like Prairie Pride, located in Missouri's Fourth Congressional District. For Missouri businesses, H.R. 4213 would extend the research and development (R&D) tax credit that encourages financial investment and job creation in America's high tech sector. The legislation would also strengthen the ability of American companies to serve customers overseas, would extend benefits for investments in economically distressed areas of our country, and would extend the 15-year cost recovery for qualified improvements to restaurants and retail space. H.R. 4213 would also extend a low-income housing tax credit exchange program that has invested more than $3.7 billion in the construction of over 49,000 low-income housing units. H.R. 4213 would extend other valuable provisions of the U.S. tax code, including deductions for charitable contributions by individuals and businesses. And, to ensure the legislation does not add to the deficit, the $31 billion cost of this legislation is offset by cracking down on tax evaders who hide their assets in offshore tax havens and ending special tax treatment for hedge fund and investment bank managers. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4213 so that we can provide tax relief and economic certainty to families and businesses in 2010.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, on Friday December 4, 2009, I had an opportunity to address the American Security Project Conference regarding the situation in Afghanistan. This speech followed a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee, which I chair, the day before. My address is as follows: [Speech given at the American Security Project Conference, Dec. 4, 2009] Beyond the Surge: Assessing the President's Afghanistan Strategy (By Ike Skelton) First, let me take a moment to thank Admiral Gunn for that introduction. You're too kind. I'd like to extend that thanks to Senator Hart and the American Security Project as a whole. You're doing great work, and I appreciate your efforts. I'd also like to say happy birthday to Evelyn Farkas, here at ASP. I would also like to thank our brave men and women in uniform. We have asked much of them in the past decade, and they have not failed to deliver. Two months ago, I wrote a letter to the President saying, essentially, that he should listen to his commanders in the field. Being a member of Congress, it took six pages to say that, but that was the basic message. I made that same point in private conversations with the President. And so it pleased me the other night when the President agreed to provide General McChrystal with additional forces needed to make this new strategy work. But before assessing the overall strategy, I think we should take a moment to remind ourselves why we're in Afghanistan and the threat we face there. Al Qa'ida presents a serious threat to our nation. Osama bin Laden and his minions have attacked us or attempted to attack us many times over the years. The most remarkable attack involved the murder of 3000 civilians--men, women, and children--but it was hardly the only attack. And I do not believe that anyone has a good reason to believe that they have given up their attempts to attack us. Following our invasion of Afghanistan in response to this attack, al Qa'ida largely fled to the border regions of Pakistan. Their Taliban allies, meanwhile, continue to escalate their attacks in an attempt to overthrow the Afghan government and drive out the international coalition. Others have differing opinions on this, but I do not believe that we can ultimately destroy al Qa'ida if we cannot prevent them from recreating a safe haven in Afghanistan. I also do not believe that we can be successful in rooting them out of Pakistan if we fail in Afghanistan. Afghanistan and Pakistan have some inherent advantages for al Qa'ida that other places may not. Having been in the region for over 20 years, they have married into local tribes and made contacts with other extremist organizations. These connections have allowed the senior leaders to hide successfully for many years. Afghanistan is also of strategic value to al Qa'ida. In losing Afghanistan, they lost not only the support of a government and the use of an entire country as a safe haven, but suffered a tremendous blow to their image. Reestablishing a safe haven in Afghanistan could rehabilitate this image among those who resent or oppose the United States, leading to increases in recruiting and funding. Nor can we consider Afghanistan and Pakistan in isolation-- the security situation in Afghanistan can have a negative impact on the stability of Pakistan. It is foolish to think that if the Taliban and al Qa'ida were able to reestablish themselves in all or part of Afghanistan, they would not lend support to those militants seeking to overthrow or destabilize the Pakistani state. Al Qa'ida has already assisted the Pakistani Taliban in carrying out attacks on the Pakistani government, and I would expect this aid to increase if al Qa'ida regained a base in Afghanistan. There was an attack at a mosque earlier today that killed dozens. With a secure base for al Qa'ida, I would expect many more such attacks. And the only thing worse than al Qa'ida loose in Afghanistan again is a destabilized, nuclear-armed Pakistan. On Tuesday night, the President proposed what I think is a good way ahead as we address this threat. From the extensive media reporting on the process, we all know how thorough a review was conducted by the White House, lasting months and including somewhere around 10 cabinet secretary level meetings and extensive consultation with every expert they could find. President Obama's strategy rightly focuses on seizing the initiative from the enemy, building Afghan capacity, and ultimately allowing the Afghan government and security forces to take the lead in fighting this war. The President has appropriately called for additional troops from our allies--this is not just America's war, and we must not allow it to become that. Perhaps more importantly, the President has put the burden of reform squarely on the Afghan government, laying out clear expectations of performance and promising support for those ministries and local leaders that perform. The President has also rightly acknowledged the importance of Pakistan. Pakistan remains a challenge, playing a key and often contradictory role in the region. Pakistan, by assisting in the pursuit of al Qa'ida and Afghan Taliban leaders, could help bring the war in Afghanistan to an end. Conversely, if Pakistan were to return to old habits of supporting the Afghan Taliban, the war may be almost impossible to win. More concerning, the continued ascendency of militant movements in the region could destabilize Pakistan, a country with nuclear weapons. This could be disastrous for all of us. I think this is a good strategy. Perhaps most importantly, it is a strategy that I believe has a good chance of success. In the past, I have often said that we lacked a strategy for the first 7 years of the war in Afghanistan. Some of my colleagues have suggested that this assertion may not be entirely fair. But, the result of whatever the prior Administration thought it was doing, ultimately resembled conducting combat operations without any thought of what we were trying to accomplish. So having a strategy, much less a good one, is a great start. President Obama also, I am pleased to say, took my advice. He listened to his military leaders, including Generals McChrystal and Petraeus, Admiral Mullen, and Secretary Gates. Ultimately, the President endorsed adding 30,000 troops to carry out his strategy. This is on top of the 21,000 he dispatched to Afghanistan earlier this year. In January 2009, there were about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. In about 7 months, there will be three times that. That is, I believe, a clear sign of the President's resolve and willingness to do what it takes to be successful in Afghanistan. Yesterday, the House Armed Services Committee, which I have to honor to chair, hosted Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen, and Deputy Secretary of State Lew. Next Tuesday, we will hear from General McChrystal and Ambassador Eikenberry. Members, properly, have a lot of questions about the strategy, and we want to make sure that the details have been thought through. I'll list a few of the areas we have explored or will next week. Many members are concerned about the July 2011 date to begin redeployment. So far, most have focused on that date as being set, rather than completely conditions based, but to me it looks like this is a case where there isn't much to complain about. Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen were pretty clear that not only were they comfortable with the date, but that they thought it served the useful purpose of motivating the Afghans. To me, what happens after that date is at least as important as the date itself. Secretary Gates testified that the process of transition that begins on that date would itself be slow and conditions-based, so that while the start of the process was fixed in time, the end could be adjusted as required. And I think that flexibility and realistic approach to a difficult process is exactly right. One other concern, and one that in my mind might be more realistic, is the unintended consequences of setting out such a message. The message of a gradual, conditions-based transition may not be understood the same way by all audiences. The Pakistanis may well believe that it signals that the United States is once again leaving the region, and that might undermine our hopes of gaining their cooperation. Various ethnic groups in Afghanistan, fearing a civil war after we begin to depart, could start stockpiling weaponry or hedge their bets in other unhelpful ways. I think we have to keep our eyes open for this possibility and be creative in reassuring the Afghans and the Pakistanis that we are not abandoning them. Corruption in the Afghan government, and the legitimacy or illegitimacy of that government, is also frequently a subject of questioning. It's a concern I share, and one that President Karzai's recent election reinforced. On the positive side, there are ministers and ministries in Afghanistan that have functioned well--Minister Wardak at the Defense Ministry and Minister Atmar at the Interior Ministry are honest effective ministers. The Health Ministry, Education Ministry, and the National Solidarity Program, run by the Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development, all seem to be functioning well. But there are also legitimate concerns. High level corruption among ministers and governors; shakedowns by police, judges, and other authorities; and perceptions that warlords are untouchable by the law feed the belief among the Afghan people that their government does not serve them. And President Karzai has not always been helpful--his family is perceived to be part of the problem, and his unwillingness to remove the immunity from some ministers so the Afghan Attorney General can indict them is not helpful. There are ways we can help push for reform--for example, not working with those leaders who prove to be corrupt so that their ability to deliver for their followers or to make money is hampered--but we have to take this seriously. President Karzai, in his inauguration speech also promised to crack down on corruption and to hold a loya jirga of national reconciliation. I would like to hear from General McChrystal and Ambassador Eikenberry how we can hold him to these promises and push to have the jirga also help develop a compact of what the Afghan people have a right to expect from their government. Members will also likely ask about the promised assessment of efforts in December 2010. I think that is a good time to begin such an assessment--six months after all the promised troops arrive in country--but members will likely have many questions about it. What will we assess? What is an acceptable level of progress? What are the options if progress is insufficient? These are all obvious questions. The one thing I would say is that I think it will behoove all of us to offer the Administration some breathing space before we make judgments about the success of the plan. Asking questions is fair, drawing conclusions about the success or failure of the strategy before it is really implemented probably isn't. So, in the first few days after the announcement of the new strategy, those are some of my thoughts. I think the President is to be commended for the strategy and the resolve he is showing. I believe he is fully aware of the threat posed by al Qa'ida and the potential posed by a sanctuary for terror in Afghanistan and a possibly destabilized Pakistan. These are serious threats we are facing, and the President is clearly prepared to take realistic, effective and fully resourced steps to address them. So I conclude as I started, by thanking all of you for what you do, and by asking you to think of the brave men and women in uniform, and the civilians who will assist them, who will have to do the hard, dangerous work to make this strategy a success. We owe them a great deal, and we should never forget it. Thank you.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, nearly all American families do not qualify for the Federal estate tax. In fact, under the law as currently written in 2009, 99.75 percent of estates are exempt. The Federal estate tax has been amended many times through the years--most recently in 2001 as part of the Republicans' omnibus tax cut legislation. That measure gradually increased estate tax exemptions and lowered estate tax rates between 2001 and 2009. In 2002, people with estates valued less than $1 million ($2 million for joint filers) after deductions for expenses, debts, and bequests to a surviving spouse or charity were exempt from paying the Federal estate tax. Those with estates above that value were taxed at a rate of 55 percent. In 2009, people with estates valued less than $3.5 million ($7 million for joint filers) after deductions for expenses, debts, and bequests to a surviving spouse or charity are exempt from paying the Federal estate tax. Those with estates above that value are taxed at a rate of 45 percent. The 2001 tax law phases out the federal estate tax in 2010 but then reinstates the tax in 2011 at the level it was in 2002--$1 million for single filers and $2 million for those filing a joint return. This fluctuation in estate tax rates has caused a great deal of confusion for business owners and farmers who are participating in estate planning. In order to provide more certainty to those individuals, the Congress has been working to set a permanent estate tax rate that would exempt nearly all but the very wealthiest Americans. Through the years, I have voted to eliminate the estate tax or to maintain suitably high exemptions to better shield farmers and small business owners from the burdens of the tax. This year, I cosponsored H.R. 3905, bipartisan legislation written by Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (D-NV) that would permanently exempt estates valued at less than $5 million for single filers and $10 million for joint filers and set the tax rate on estates valued above that amount at 45 percent on a decreasing scale to 35 percent over the next ten years. I have also cosponsored H.R. 3524, the Family Farm Preservation and Conservation Estate Tax Act, which was introduced by Congressman Mike Thompson. This legislation would add a provision to the federal tax code allowing farmers and ranchers to defer payment of the Federal estate tax as long as the land is owned within the family and remains in agricultural production. H.R. 3524 would also defer the tax for land placed into a conservation easement. The measure would represent a win for farmers, for conservation and hunters, and for all of rural America. That is why it is supported by groups like the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the National Corn Growers Association, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the National Milk Producers Federation, the National Pork Producers Council, the Dairy Farmers of America, and the Agricultural Retailers Association. While I would have preferred the House of Representatives to consider one of these well-written bills, the House of Representatives has considered a different measure, H.R. 4154, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009, which would permanently extend the estate tax levels at the current, 2009 rates. It is very important for families, farmers, and businesses to have greater certainty with respect to estate planning. Groups representing a good number of Missourians expressed to me their views on this issue. The Dairy Farmers of America, which represents nearly 18,000 dairy producers in America, urged Congress to ``take action now on this important measure'' and to ``support H.R. 4154.'' The American Farm Bureau Federation, while neutral on the bill, indicated the ``need for certainty in estate tax law and the importance of maintaining the stepped-up basis.'' And, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations, wrote that Congress should ``expeditiously approve a permanent estate tax solution to provide certainty for family-owned businesses and farms.'' The Chamber further indicated that ``H.R. 4154, the `Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009,' is a step towards this goal.'' As a rural Missouri Congressman, I understand that farms and small businesses are disproportionately impacted by the Federal estate tax. That is why I supported H.R. 4154. Under the 2009 estate tax guidelines, nearly all small businesses and farms are exempt from paying the tax. Only a small fraction of all estates in America-- 9,600--are expected to owe Federal estate taxes in 2009. For farmers, USDA data indicate that, after deductions, approximately 554 farm estates throughout our Nation would be considered taxable. We should strive to reduce the number of farms and small businesses that are subject to the Federal estate tax. As I have mentioned, I have cosponsored legislation to do just that. And, to make clear my view that we should strive for higher tax exemptions, I was one of only 21 Democrats to vote with Republicans against the Rule to consider H.R. 4154 in the House of Representatives and was one of only 18 Democrats to vote with Republicans to send H.R. 4154 back to the Ways and Means Committee so that it could be improved. At the end of the day, though, both of those procedural votes failed and we were left with two choices--either pass a bill to give farmers and small business owners more certainty or sit back and do nothing, which would allow the rates to become more painful to farmers and small business owners over the next 2 years. To me, that choice was easy. H.R. 4154 is a step in the right direction and I look forward to working with the Senate on this important legislation.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this means to acknowledge Warsaw, Missouri, and the efforts of the Parks and Recreation Department to turn this beautiful city into Missouri's most bike- friendly community. Already a destination city for Americans seeking to enjoy Missouri's two largest lakes, Warsaw is working to become a model city for healthy living. Under the leadership of City Administrator Randy Pogue and Parks and Recreation Director Mac Vorce, Warsaw plans to build a network of 15 to 20 miles of trails that radiate from the city center like the spokes of a wheel. These trails will connect the major area attractions and allow the residents of Warsaw to travel by bicycle to school and work. By building this impressive network of trails, Warsaw is creating a culture of healthy living. Pogue and Vorce hope that these trails will inspire Missourians to get out of the house, put down the television remote, and enjoy the breath-taking beauty of the Fourth District of Missouri. What began as a dream eight years ago is now close to becoming a reality due to the hard work of Pogue, Vorce, and their visionary team of engineers and staff members. After this House passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February of this year, Warsaw applied for and received two grants to fund the renovation of Steamboat Landing and the surrounding area. This federal stimulus money, coupled with ``handshake funds'' from the Corps of Engineers, will allow Warsaw to finish this project and provide greater access to the beauty of this city. Madam Speaker, Warsaw, which is situated in the heart of the Fourth District, is blessed with the God-given beauty of its natural surroundings. I trust that my fellow members of the House will join me in recognizing Warsaw as a model for healthy living and the promotion of the great outdoors.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this means to honor Major General John R. Alison, a distinguished Airman, a dedicated public servant, and a true American hero. Major General Alison served in the United States Air Force during World War II and the Korean War and also served as Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics under President Harry Truman. Known as the father of Air Force Special Operations, Major General Alison turned 97 on November 21, 2009. As a boy growing up in central Florida, Major General Alison dreamed of becoming a pilot for the United States. He graduated from the University of Florida School of Engineering in 1936 and soon after joined the United States Army Air Corps. He earned his wings in 1937 at Kelly Field and went on to serve as the assistant Military Attache in England and the Soviet Union. During World War II, Major General Alison served as commander of the 75th Fighter Squadron, formerly known as the ``Flying Tigers.'' With seven confirmed victories and numerous probable kills, he ended his tour as a combat ace and earned a Distinguished Service Cross and a Silver Star for his unmatched courage and skill. Major General Alison returned home in May of 1943 only to be recalled to co-command the highly innovative 1st Air Commando Group. This secret flying unit flew over 200 miles into enemy territory in support of some 9,000 Allied forces. For his skill and courage as a pilot, he was inducted into the Air Commando Hall of Fame in 1994. After the war, President Harry Truman called on Major General Alison to serve as Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics. In this role, he developed thoughtful recommendations on U.S. foreign policy relating to the Soviet Union, the Marshall Plan, and the European Recovery Program. These recommendations and other documents from his time as Assistant Secretary are held at the Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. Madam Speaker, Major General John R. Alison has spent his life fighting for our country as a pilot and a public servant. Never wavering in his commitment to freedom and the ideals of our country, he sets a high standard for all Americans. I am proud to call him my friend, and I trust that my fellow members of the House will join me in recognizing this courageous and talented American.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, November is National Epilepsy Awareness Month, and I rise today to help bring awareness to the month and to this year's theme, which is ``Talk About It.'' Epilepsy is a neurological condition that affects more than 3 million Americans and more than 50 million people worldwide. It affects people of all ages, nations, and races. A burst of electrical energy in the brain can cause an individual with epilepsy to experience a seizure. Seizures can be mild, but sadly, in some cases, they are fatal. In 2008, Congress passed legislation to establish epilepsy centers of excellence within the Veterans Administration. A traumatic brain injury can put a servicemember at greater risk for developing epilepsy in later years. And these centers of excellence will help ensure our veterans receive top-of-the-line care. Fortunately, research into epilepsy has resulted in the development of medications and other treatments that have proven successful in controlling epileptic seizures. However, these treatments are not effective for everyone with epilepsy, which means more work remains. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing National Epilepsy Awareness Month and to pay tribute to all those working to promote a greater understanding.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this moment to recognize and honor MAJ Toby D. Patterson, United States Marine Corps, for his service to the U.S. House of Representatives as he prepares to depart Capitol Hill. After serving over 2\1/2\ years as a liaison officer and the Deputy Director of the United States Marine Corps Liaison Office in the U.S. House of Representatives, he will be attending the Australian Command and Staff College in Canberra, Australia. While serving in the Liaison office, Major Patterson developed and executed a legislative strategy for the United States Marine Corps that was instrumental in training and equipping the Marine Corps and ensuring their success on the battlefield. By engaging members of Congress and their staffs, Major Patterson directly facilitated an increased emphasis on improving Congressional relationships, which is a cornerstone of the Corps' strategic vision. During his time on Capitol Hill, Major Patterson successfully planned, coordinated and escorted over 50 international and domestic Congressional and Staff Delegations. His attention to detail and anticipation of requirements allowed my fellow members of the House to focus on fact-finding and gleaning new insights that informed critical decisions to support the people of the United States. Due to his professionalism, dedication and knowledge, Major Patterson became a highly sought after military escort for delegations traveling into Combat and Post Conflict Zones. The time he has spent supporting members of the House has been truly noteworthy. Major Patterson has distinguished himself as a man of many talents. While working in a challenging environment, he earned a Master's degree from the University of Oklahoma, completed the Marine Corps Non- Resident Command and Staff College, and succeeded as an accomplished athlete having run two Marine Corps Marathons and completing a full Ironman Triathlon. Madam Speaker, as Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, I have benefitted personally from Major Patterson's invaluable insights and hold great appreciation for the caliber of his work. He sets a high standard for others to emulate, and our Nation benefits from his outstanding dedication and leadership. I am certain that the members of the House will join me in wishing Major Patterson and his wife, Lindsey, continued success in their future endeavors.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chair, as the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, I study national security issues a great deal and fully understand the risks posed by terrorism. Terrorists from home and abroad have killed innocent Americans, which is why we in Congress have an obligation to diminish the likelihood of these kinds of terrorist attacks by strengthening our military, by giving law enforcement additional tools, and by authorizing common sense homeland security regulations. But, in writing laws to protect the American people, we must carefully consider how new regulations might impact citizens and businesses. In 2006, Congress directed the Department of Homeland Security to establish risk-based security performance standards for chemical facilities that use or store chemicals that can be attractive to terrorists. The Department issued its final chemical security regulations--the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards--in 2007, and, since then, businesses have been working in a collaborative manner with the Department to implement them. For agriculture, the Department has acknowledged the unique nature of farming with respect to chemical regulations and has indefinitely exempted from regulation all end-users of chemicals used in agriculture, including farms, ranches, and other crop, feed, or livestock facilities. In October 2009, the authority for the Department of Homeland Security to regulate chemical facilities expired. It was recently extended for one year through the fiscal year 2010 Homeland Security appropriations bill. In an effort to more permanently extend the Department's authority to regulate chemical facilities and to expand federal regulations to drinking water and waste water facilities, the House of Representatives considered H.R. 2868, the Chemical and Water Security Act of 2009. To be sure, improving the security around these entities is an important national security objective, and the House Homeland Security Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee deserve a great deal of praise for gluing together H.R. 2868. However, as a Congressman from rural Missouri, I examined H.R. 2868 through the lens of the farmers I represent. Some in the agricultural community do not support portions of this legislation relating to so- called Inherently Safer Technology requirements. They believe these new requirements could force makers of their fertilizers to change to more expensive or less effective products, eventually adding to producers' input costs. I realize that the Committees of jurisdiction over H.R. 2868 worked hard to reach out to the agricultural community and that the bill was improved in Committee by Congressman Mike Ross (D-AR) and Congressman Zach Space (D-OH) who added technical assistance grants for agricultural wholesalers. I also fully appreciate that the Department has exempted farms from its regulations for an indefinite period of time. But, after careful consideration and review, it seems more work remains to assuage agriculture's concerns about the Inherently Safer Technology requirements. As H.R. 2868 was presented in the House, I could not lend my support to it based on the concerns of my farmers and Missouri's agricultural retailers.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, I rise today to personally thank and commend the 2,837 personnel--including Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Department of Defense civilians and contractors, and coalition liaisons from Canada, Poland, Jordan, and Australia--of the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany. These dedicated folks do yeoman's work in providing world class comprehensive care to our warriors wounded in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom and to more than 52,000 American military personnel and their families in the Kaiserslautern Military Community. They also provide specialized care to nearly 245,000 American military personnel and their families throughout the European Theater. I can personally attest to the phenomenal work done at Landstuhl. During a visit to Iraq over Thanksgiving 2005, Congressman Tim Murphy and I were injured in a motor vehicle accident. After receiving excellent care at the Combat Support Hospital in Baghdad, we were moved by C-17 to Landstuhl. I spent several days in room 7 of the Intensive Care Unit there. It is not an understatement to say that the care I received was outstanding. I am sure any of our troops who have been treated there and their families would attest to the same. Along with my committee's ranking member, Buck McKeon, I will soon be leading a congressional delegation to visit wounded servicemembers and all who care for them at Landstuhl for Thanksgiving dinner. Given the spirit of that holiday, this statement--which I will frame to present to the personnel there--is a fitting tribute to the excellence they deliver every day. Landstuhl averages over 1,000 total inpatients per month, with a daily average of 20 surgical cases, and 21 admissions and discharges per day. They also bring new life into the world, with an average of three live births per day. They provide specialized care in fields ranging from cardiology to infectious disease to neurology. If it is medically possible, the professionals at Landstuhl make it happen. Our servicemembers know that they and their families will be taken care of. Perhaps most importantly, though, Landstuhl plays a critical role in caring for our warriors wounded in combat and bringing them back home. After initial treatment in theater, critical care air transport teams bring wounded servicemembers to Landstuhl for stabilization and treatment before being transported to Andrews Air Force Base. The folks at Landstuhl see the vast majority of our wounded and injured in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, and they administer the best that modern medicine has to offer. I also praise the nonmedical services offered at Landstuhl, including liaisons for finance and personnel issues, invitational travel orders for family members and transportation from the airport, issuance of basic civilian clothing and sundry items, and AAFES vouchers and personal shoppers, among other services. This comprehensive care provides the right environment to begin the healing process. Here, I must also thank those who embody the giving spirit of our Nation. I speak, of course, of the selfless service of the American Red Cross volunteers, Fisher House volunteers and staff, and the members of the USO who make themselves available to our servicemembers and their families 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. No need is too big or too small and no problem too difficult for this group. Their perseverance, creativity, and unyielding commitment to helping others have humbled many a hardened warrior, and we are indeed fortunate to have their support. Madam Speaker, I am proud to know that we have such an immensely capable group of people looking after the health and well-being of servicemembers and their families. As chairman of the Armed Services Committee and as a former patient, I pay great tribute to the excellence and sacrifice of all who serve at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. They all deserve our thanks and support.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 895) honoring the lives of the brave soldiers and civilians of the United States Army who died or were wounded in the tragic attack of November 5, 2009 at Fort Hood, Texas.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this resolution.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Less than 24 hours ago our Nation was shocked to learn that a shooting had taken place at Fort Hood, Texas, one of the largest military bases in our country. Over the course of these initial news reports, we were saddened to learn that at least 13 soldiers were killed or have died and more than 30 were wounded, including the alleged assailant and the officer who was instrumental in bringing an end to the shooting. What was shocking to most Americans is that a fellow member is alleged to have carried out this vicious attack on his comrades in arms. Yesterday, as these soldiers were in the midst of preparing for combat overseas, a fellow soldier opened fire on these unsuspecting patriots and those civilians and soldiers who were supporting them. While many of those who were there were spared from the flying bullets, a number of these courageous soldiers and civilians were wounded, and they will face months, perhaps even years, recovering from their wounds. The heartache for these individuals and their families will be compounded by the fact that they will face these challenges knowing they were injured in the line of duty by an individual from within their own ranks. In the following days and months to come, these individuals and their families will need both emotional and physical sustainment and encouragement. It is our responsibility to ensure that they and their families have the resources they need to make a full and complete recovery. Our prayers are with those who have lost a loved one in this senseless killing. These military families are already stressed with the thought of their family member deploying to Afghanistan or Iraq for a year, of the holidays and special moments that they would not share because of this deployment. And now their world has been turned upside down. Those last days prior to deployment when many families often make special plans to spend those few precious moments together have been taken away. This morning, they will awaken to the realization that time will not bring their family member home to their welcoming arms. These families will need much love and support in the coming days; and we, as Americans, will be there with them and for them in their time of need. Mr. Speaker, there is an ongoing investigation into this incident, and it is not appropriate for us to speculate on the motivations and why this occurrence happened. The investigation should be allowed to be completed without intervention as quickly as possible so it can bring closure to those who were tragically impacted by this event. My thoughts and my prayers go out to those who have lost a loved one and to those who have been wounded, but I also want to reach out to all of our military families who are stationed around the world, who each understandably are touched by the heartbreaking events of yesterday at Fort Hood. Mr. Speaker, I am extremely saddened by this occurrence. All of us in this body are extremely saddened by this occurrence. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) be permitted to control the remainder of my time.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. I certainly thank the gentleman from Missouri for yielding, and I compliment him on this effort today which I fully support, as well as for his successful effort when he was mayor of Kansas City. The Liberty Memorial is not only a landmark, it is a museum that is like no other museum in our country. It reflects that war, the war to end all wars in which America was engaged so deeply. And this memorial has a special meaning for me, Mr. Speaker, since my father served in the Navy during that war. If you go into the memorial, you will see his picture in his pancake hat with USS Missouri emblazoned on the front with the ribbon down the back. He was so proud of his service in that war. Those folks are gone now, but this serves as a memorial to them, and more than that, and it serves as a museum like none other. It is good for people interested in the art of warfare, it is good for people who understand and enjoy history to go there and learn. It is a special place for all those in uniform to reflect upon what America did in yesteryear. This is a wonderful undertaking. I am so proud of the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver) for this resolution. I compliment him and fully support it and hope it has a unanimous vote.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I include for the record a letter from the Department Commander and Department Adjutant of the Department of Missouri, The American Legion, as well as an American Legion Department of Missouri resolution to designate the Liberty Memorial of Kansas City at the National World War I Museum as the National World War I Memorial. The American Legion, Department of Missouri, Inc., Jefferson City, MO, October 7, 2009. Representative Ike Skelton, Rayburn Office Bldg., Washington, DC. Dear Representative Skelton: On Behalf of the 54,000 Legionnaires of The American Legion Department of Missouri, we would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your service to our Country and to the citizens of the Great State of Missouri. Recently during our 91st Annual Department Convention, held in Jefferson City, Missouri, we adopted Missouri Resolution Three, which urges the Congress of the United States to designate the Liberty Memorial, at the National World War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, as ``The National World War I Memorial.'' I have attached a copy of said resolution. The Liberty Memorial site was dedicated in November of 1921 and marks the only time in history that five Allied Military Leaders were present to honor the more that 4,000,000 men and women that served during World War I. General of the Armies John J. Pershing, a native of Missouri, noted on that day ``the people of Kansas City, Missouri are deeply proud of this beautiful memorial, erected in Tribute to the Patriotism, the gallant achievements, and the heroic sacrifices of their sons and daughters who served in our country's Armed Forces during the World War. It Symbolized their grateful appreciation of Duty Well Done, and appreciation, which I share, because I know so well how richly it is merited.'' The Memorial has been and still remains a proud part of the patriotic heritage of, not only the people of Missouri, but of the United States of America and should be designated as ``The National World War I Memorial''. Thank you for your consideration and continued support. Sincerely, Victor J. Stragliati, Department Commander. Wade F. Prosser, Department Adjutant. Resolution Subject: Designate Liberty Memorial, Kansas City, Missouri at the National World War I Museum as the National World War I Memorial. Whereas more than 4,000,000 American served in World War I, and Whereas there is no nationally recognized Memorial honoring the Service of those over 4,000,000 American, and Whereas in 1919 (90 years ago since this is 2009) the people of Kansas City, Missouri, expressed an outpouring of support and raised more than $2,000,000 in two (2) weeks for a Memorial to the service of American who served in World War I. This fund was an accomplishment Unparalleled by any other city in the United States Irrespective of population and reflected the passion of Public opinion about World War I, which had so recently ended, and Whereas following the drive, a national architectural competition was held by the American Institute of Architects for designs for a memorial to the service of Americans in World War I, and the competition yielded a design by Architect H. Van Buren Magonigle, and Whereas on November 1, 1921, more than 100,000 people witnessed the dedication of the site for the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City, Missouri, and Whereas the dedication of the site on November 1, 1921 marked the only time in history that the five (5) allied Military Leaders present, Lieutenant General Baron Jacques of Belgium, General Armando Diaz of Italy, Marshal Ferdinand Foch of France, Admiral Lord Earl Beatty of Great Britain, and General of the Armies John J. Pershing of the United States of America, were together at one place, and Whereas General of the Armies John J. Pershing, a native of Missouri and the Commander of the American Expeditionary Forces in World War I, noted at the November 1, 1921 Dedication that ``the people of Kansas City, Missouri are deeply proud of the beautiful memorial, erected in Tribute to the patriotism, the gallant achievements, and the heroic sacrifices of their sons and daughters who served in our country's armed forces during the World War. It symbolized their grateful appreciation of duty well done, and appreciation which I share, because I know so well how richly it is merited'', and Whereas during an Armistice Day ceremony in 1924, President Calvin Coolidge marked the beginning of a three year construction project for the Liberty Memorial by the Laying of the cornerstone, and Whereas the 217 foot Liberty Memorial Tower has an inscription that reads, ``In honor of Those Who Served in the World War in Defense of Liberty and Our Country'' as well as Four (4) stone ``Guardian Spirits'' representing Courage, Honors, Patriotism, and Sacrifices, which rise above the Observation deck, making the Liberty Memorial a noble Tribute to all who served in World War I, and Whereas during a rededication of the Liberty Memorial in 1961, World War 1 Veterans and former Presidents Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower recognized the memorial as a constant reminder of the sacrifices during World War I and the progress that followed, and Whereas the 106th Congress recognized the Liberty Memorial as a National Symbol of World War I, and Whereas the 108th Congress designated that the museum at the base of The Liberty Memorial as ``American's National World War I Museum'', and Whereas the American's National World War I Museum is the only Public museum in the United States specifically Dedicated to the History of World War I, and Whereas the National World War I Museum is known throughout the World as a major center of World War I remembrance, now Therefore, be it Resolved: by The American Legion Department of Missouri in regular Convention assembled in Jefferson City, Missouri on July 16, 17, 18, and 19, That The American Legion Department of Missouri urges The Congress of The United States of America to designate The Liberty Memorial, Kansas City, Missouri at the National World War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri as the ``NATIONAL WORLD WAR I

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, I rise to express my support for H. Res. 868 and to request that the following exchange of letters regarding this resolution be included in the Congressional Record. House of Representatives, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Washington, DC, October 28, 2009. Hon. Ike Skelton, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: On October 23, 2009, H. Res. 868, ``Honoring and recognizing the service and achievements of current and former female members of the Armed Forces,'' was introduced in the House of Representatives. This measure was sequentially referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. The Committee on Veterans' Affairs recognizes the importance of H. Res. 868 and the need to move this resolution expeditiously in order to honor the current and former female members of the Armed Forces. Therefore, while we have valid jurisdictional claims to this resolution, the Committee on Veterans' Affairs will waive further consideration of H. Res. 868. The Committee does so with the understanding that by waiving further consideration of this resolution it does not waive any future jurisdictional claims over similar measures. I would appreciate the inclusion of this letter and a copy of your response in the Congressional Record during consideration of H. Res. 868 on the House floor. Sincerely, Bob Filner, Chairman.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this time to honor a great American service member, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Zinno. During a terrific storm in 1946, Lt. Col. Zinno successfully landed a plane carrying the members of the Sharon Rogers All-Girl Band, a USO sponsored orchestra which performed for American troops serving in East Asia. Born in Providence, Rhode Island, in 1923, Lt. Col. Zinno developed a fascination with flight as a child and was often seen sketching planes on spare pieces of paper or sneaking to the local airport hangar to watch the occasional take-off. His passion for aviation led him to the Army Air Corps. After earning his wings and bars in 1944, Lt. Col. Zinno began his first assignment with the 63rd Troop Carrier Group in Sedalia, Missouri, part of my home district. Lt. Col. Zinno's skill as an aviator came to a test on January 20, 1946, when he was ordered to ferry the Sharon Rogers All-Girl Band from Seoul, Korea, to Tokyo, Japan. When Lt. Col. Zinno flew through a treacherous thunderhead, his C-46 dropped 3,500 feet in a matter of seconds. Remaining calm, the courageous pilot navigated the storm with little visibility and safely landed the plane in the Shimonoseki Strait, a strip of water littered with mines and high tension wires. With every passenger and crew member alive and safe, a Japanese fishing boat brought the orchestra and flight crew to safe ground. Madam Speaker, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Zinno has distinguished himself throughout his long career as a talented and courageous pilot. His nerves of steel and gutsy determination may well have saved the lives of the Sharon Rogers All-Girl Band. I trust that the Members of the House will join me in honoring this brave pilot for his contributions to our country.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, it is with great sadness that I inform the House of the death of Rear Admiral Wayne E. Meyer. He is known as the ``Father of Aegis'' for his 13 years of work on the Aegis Weapons systems. Adm. Meyer was born in Brunswick, Missouri, on April 21, 1926. In 1943, he enlisted with the Navy. While serving with the Navy, he graduated from the University of Kansas in 1946 with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering. He also obtained a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and M.S. in Astronautics and Aeronautics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Additionally, he received a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the Naval Postgraduate School. His engineering education would later help with his work on developing advanced weapons systems for the Navy. One of Adm. Meyer's first assignments found him manning the radar of the USS Goodrich only after 11 months of radar and sonar training at M.I.T. In the post-World War II period, he served as part of the occupation forces in the Mediterranean, China, and Japan seas. Upon his return to the U.S., he enrolled and taught in variety of schools from 1951-1955. These included studying at the Joint Guided Missile School in Fort Bliss, Texas, and the Naval Line School in Monterey, California. He later was instructor at the Special Weapons School in Norfolk Virginia. Following his studies at Monterey and M.I.T., he was ordered to the USS Galveston, where he served as Gunnery Sergeant and eventually oversaw the conversion to the first Talos missiles on the cruiser. In 1963, he was chosen to serve in the Navy Task Force for Surface Guided Missile Systems. Later, he was also appointed to assist with the analog to high-speed digital system transition on 30 Terrier-armed ships. He became the Director of Engineering at the Naval Ship Missile Systems Engineering Station in 1967. Three years later, he was called to Washington, D.C., to head the Aegis Weapons System. In the following years, he was named supervisor of many projects, including the Surface Missile Systems and Surface Warfare. In January 1975, he was chosen for Rear Admiral. Shortly after his selection, he became the founding Project Manager of Aegis Shipbuilding, and, in 1983, he was reassigned as Deputy Commander, Weapons and Combat Systems, Naval Sea Systems Command. Eventually, he retired from active duty in 1985. In his retirement, Adm. Meyer served in a variety of consulting positions, including assisting the Surface Navy and the Missile Defense Agency's development of missile defense capability for the nation's Aegis fleet and serving on many committees chartered by Department of Defense personnel. Madam Speaker, Admiral Wayne E. Meyer was an honorable officer in the military. I am certain that the members of the House will join me in extending their heartfelt condolences to his family and friends. He will be greatly missed.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, on September 12, 2009, the Honorable Emanuel Cleaver, Congressman from Missouri's Fifth Congressional District, sponsored a remarkable event at the Truman Library. This event was in honor of those who fought in the Vietnam War in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Well over 1,000 veterans attended. The Honorable Dennis Moore, Congressman from Kansas's Third Congressional District, spoke, and yours truly had an opportunity to deliver a message of gratitude to the Vietnam veterans present. The keynote speaker was Major General (Ret.) Robert H. Scales, former commandant of the U.S. Army War College. His address was very well received by the veterans in the audience. The address is as follows: [Sept. 12, 2009] Truman Library Speech (By MG (Ret.) Robert H. Scales) Mr. Skelton, Mr Cleaver, distinguished guests and, most importantly, fellow veterans. What a great thrill it is see my comrades in arms assembled here so many years after we shared our experiences in war. Let me give you the bottom line up front: I'm proud I served in Vietnam. Like you I didn't kill innocents, I killed the enemy; I didn't fight for big oil or for some lame conspiracy I fought for a country I believed in and for the buddies who kept me alive. Like you I was troubled that, unlike my father, I didn't come back to a grateful nation. It took a generation and another war, Desert Storm, for the nation to come back to me. Also like you I remember the war being 99 percent boredom and one percent pure abject terror. But not all my memories of Vietnam are terrible. There were times when I enjoyed my service in combat. Such sentiment must seem strange to a society today that has, thanks to our superb volunteer military, been completely insulated from war. If they thought about Vietnam at all our fellow citizens would imagine that fifty years would have been sufficient to erase this unpleasant war from our consciousness. Looking over this assembly it's obvious that the memory lingers, and those of us who fought in that war remember. The question is why? If this war was so terrible why are we here? It's my privilege today to try to answer that question not only for you, brother veterans, but maybe for a wider audience for whom, fifty years on, Vietnam is as strangely distant as World War One was to our generation. Vietnam is seared in our memory for the same reason that wars have lingered in the minds of soldiers for as long as wars have been fought. From Marathon to Mosul young men and now women have marched off to war to learn that the cold fear of violent death and the prospects of killing another human being heighten the senses and sear these experiences deeply and irrevocably into our souls and linger in the back recesses of our minds. After Vietnam we may have gone on to thrilling lives or dull; we might have found love or loneliness, success or failure. But our experiences have stayed with us in brilliant Technicolor and with a clarity undiminished by time. For what ever primal reason war heightens the senses. When in combat we see sharper, hear more clearly and develop a sixth sense about everything around us. Remember the sights? I recall sitting in the jungle one bright moonlit night marveling on the beauty of Vietnam. How lush and green it was; how attractive and gentle the people, how stoic and unmoved they were amid the chaos that surrounded them. Do you remember the sounds? Where else could you stand outside a bunker and listen to the cacophonous mix of Jimi Hendrix, Merle Haggard and Jefferson Airplane? Or how about the sounds of incoming? Remember it wasn't a boom like in the movies but a horrifying noise like a passing train followed by a crack and the whistle of flying fragments. Remember the smells? The sharpness of cordite, the choking stench of rotting jungle and the tragic sweet smell of enemy dead . . . I remember the touch, the wet, sticky sensation when I touched one of my wounded soldiers one last time before the medevac rushed him forever from our presence but not from my memory, and the guilt I felt realizing that his pain was caused by my inattention and my lack of experience. Even taste is a sense that brings back memories. Remember the end of the day after the log bird flew away leaving mail, C rations and warm beer? Only the first sergeant had sufficient gravitas to be allowed to turn the C ration cases over so that all of us could reach in and pull out a box on the unlabeled side hoping that it wasn't going to be ham and lima beans again. Look, forty years on I can forgive the guy who put powder in our ammunition so foul that it caused our M-16s to jam. I'm OK with helicopters that arrived late. I'm over artillery landing too close and the occasional canceled air strike. But I will never forgive the Pentagon bureaucrat who in an incredibly lame moment thought that a soldier would open a can of that green, greasy, gelatinous goo called ham and lima beans and actually eat it. But to paraphrase that iconic war hero of our generation, Forrest Gump, ``Life is like a case of C Rations, you never know what you're going to get.'' Because for every box of ham and lima beans there was that rapturous moment when you would turn over the box and discover the bacchanalian joy of peaches and pound cake. It's all a metaphor for the surreal nature of that war and its small pleasures . . . those who have never known war cannot believe that anyone can find joy in hot beer and cold pound cake. But we can . . . Another reason why Vietnam remains in our consciousness is that the experience has made us better. Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing for war as a self improvement course. And I realize that war's trauma has damaged many of our fellow veterans physically, psychologically and morally. But recent research on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder by behavioral scientists has unearthed a phenomenon familiar to most veterans: that the trauma of war strengthens rather than weakens us (They call it Post Traumatic Growth). We know that a near death experience makes us better leaders by increasing our self reliance, resilience, self image, confidence and ability to deal with adversity. Combat veterans tend to approach the future wiser, more spiritual and content with an amplified appreciation for life. We know this is true. It's nice to see that the human scientists now agree. I'm proud that our service left a legacy that has made today's military better. Sadly Americans too often prefer to fight wars with technology. Our experience in Vietnam taught the nation the lesson that war is inherently a human not a technological endeavor. Our experience is a distant whisper in the ear of today's technology wizards that firepower is not sufficient to win, that the enemy has a vote, that the object of war should not be to kill the enemy but to win the trust and allegiance of the people and that the ultimate weapon in this kind or war is a superbly trained, motivated, and equipped soldier who is tightly bonded to his buddies and who trusts his leaders. I've visited our young men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan several times. On each visit I've seen first hand the strong connection between our war and theirs. These are worthy warriors who operate in a manner remarkably reminiscent of the way we fought so many years ago. The similarities are surreal. Close your eyes for a moment and it all comes rushing back . . . In Afghanistan I watched soldiers from my old unit, the 101st Airborne Division, as they conducted daily patrols from firebases constructed and manned in a manner virtually the same as those we occupied and fought from so many years ago. Every day these sky soldiers trudge outside the wire and climb across impossible terrain with the purpose as one sergeant put it ``to kill the bad guys, protect the good guys and bring home as many of my soldiers as I can.'' Your legacy is alive and well. You should be proud. The timeless connection between our generation and theirs can be seen in the unity and fighting spirit of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Again and again, I get asked the same old question from folks who watch soldiers in action on television: why is their morale so high? Don't they know the American people are getting fed up with these wars? Don't they know Afghanistan is going badly? Often they come to me incredulous about what they perceive as a misspent sense of patriotism and loyalty. I tell them time and again what every one of you sitting here today, those of you who have seen the face of war, understand: it's not really about loyalty. It's not about a belief in some abstract notion concerning war aims or national strategy. It's not even about winning or losing. On those lonely firebases as we dug through C ration boxes and drank hot beer we didn't argue the righteousness of our cause or ponder the latest pronouncements from McNamara or Nixon or Ho Chi Minh for that matter. Some of us might have trusted our leaders or maybe not. We might have been well informed and passionate about the protests at home or maybe not. We might have groused about the rich and privileged who found a way to avoid service but we probably didn't. We might have volunteered for the war to stop the spread of global communism or maybe we just had a failing semester and got swept up in the draft. In war young soldiers think about their buddies. They talk about families, wives and girlfriends and relate to each other through very personal confessions. For the most part the military we served with in Vietnam did not come from the social elite. We didn't have Harvard degrees or the pedigree of political bluebloods. We were in large measure volunteers and draftees from middle and lower class America. Just as in Iraq today we came from every corner of our country to meet in a beautiful yet harsh and forbidding place, a place that we've seen and experienced but can never explain adequately to those who were never there. Soldiers suffer, fight and occasionally die for each other. It's as simple as that. What brought us to fight in the jungle was no different than the motive force that compels young soldiers today to kick open a door in Ramadi with the expectation that what lies on the other side is either an innocent huddling with a child in her arms or a fanatic insurgent yearning to buy his ticket to eternity by killing the infidel. No difference. Patriotism and a paycheck may get a soldier into the military but fear of letting his buddies down gets a soldier to do something that might just as well get him killed. What makes a person successful in America today is a far cry from what would have made him a success in the minds of those assembled here today. Big bucks gained in law or real estate, or big deals closed on the stock market made some of our countrymen rich. But as they have grown older they now realize that they have no buddies. There is no one who they are willing to die for or who is willing to die for them. William Manchester served as a Marine in the Pacific during World War II and put the sentiment precisely right when he wrote: ``Any man in combat who lacks comrades who will die for him, or for whom he is willing to die is not a man at all. He is truly damned.'' The Anglo Saxon heritage of buddy loyalty is long and frightfully won. Almost six hundred years ago the English king, Henry V, waited on a cold and muddy battlefield to face a French army many times his size. Shakespeare captured the ethos of that moment in his play Henry V. To be sure Shakespeare wasn't there but he was there in spirit because he understood the emotions that gripped and the bonds that brought together both king and soldier. Henry didn't talk about national strategy. He didn't try to justify faulty intelligence or ill formed command decisions that put his soldiers at such a terrible disadvantage. Instead, he talked about what made English soldiers fight and what in all probably would allow them to prevail the next day against terrible odds. Remember this is a monarch talking to his men: This story shall the good man teach his son; From this day ending to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be remembered; We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother; And gentlemen in England (or America) now a-bed Shall think themselves accursed they were not here, And hold their manhood's cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day. You all here assembled inherit the spirit of St. Crispin's day. You know and understand the strength of comfort that those whom you protect, those in America now abed, will never know. You have lived a life of self awareness and personal satisfaction that those who watched you from afar in this country who ``hold their manhood cheap'' can only envy. I don't care whether America honors or even remembers the good service we performed in Vietnam. It doesn't bother me that war is an image that America would rather ignore. It's enough for me to have the privilege to be among you. It's sufficient to talk to each of you about things we have seen and kinships we have shared in the tough and heartless crucible of war. Some day we will all join those who are serving so gallantly now and have preceded us on battlefields from Gettysburg to Wanat. We will gather inside a firebase to open a case of C rations with every box peaches and pound cake. We will join with a band of brothers to recount the experience of serving something greater than ourselves. I believe in my very soul that the almightily reserves a corner of heaven, probably around a perpetual lager where some day we can meet and embrace . . . all of the band of brothers throughout the ages to tell our stories while envious standers-by watch and wonder how horrific and incendiary the crucible of violence must have been to bring such a disparate assemblage so close to the hand of God. Until we meet there thank you for your service, thank you for your sacrifice, God bless you all and God bless this great nation. . . .

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, during the August District Work Period, I traveled extensively throughout Missouri's Fourth Congressional district, meeting with residents who were eager to share their views on a variety of Federal matters. In separate visits with Missouri credit union officials and small town Missouri bankers, the state of the economy and Congress' efforts to make financial services more responsive to every day citizens were top priorities for discussion. Earlier this year, Congress passed and the President signed into law the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act, bipartisan legislation to make credit card agreements more customer friendly. I supported this measure and am pleased it has become the law of the land. But, when I met with credit union officials in August, they brought to my attention a technical error in the law that is making it difficult for them to provide lines of credit to some of their members. When I returned to Washington in September, I immediately brought the credit unions' concerns to the attention of Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank. And, at the same time, my colleague from Vermont, Congressman Peter Welch, drafted responsible legislation--which we are considering here in the House today--to correct this technical error so that credit unions can continue offering open-end credit plans that are popular with many of their members. Chairman Frank, Mr. Welch, and their staffs have worked diligently to fix this problem for America's credit unions. I am pleased that they have moved this bill so quickly through the legislative process. I urge my colleagues to support Mr. Welch's legislation and hope the other body will act to pass it soon. Missouri Credit Union Association, St. Louis, MO, August 27, 2009. Hon. Ike Skelton, Rayburn Building, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Skelton: Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to meet with Missouri credit unions this month in the district. As discussed, Missouri credit unions are extremely concerned about unintended consequences created by the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009, and the serious implications for consumers in our state. We are asking for your help and support in a legislative solution. Credit unions did not participate in the consumer abuses regarding credit cards that prompted passage of the CARD Act of 2009, and do not have an issue with complying with the provisions of the CARD Act that relate specifically to credit card accounts. However, sections of the Act applying to open-end credit plans do affect credit unions and will disadvantage credit union members. Credit unions, working with their members, often set up open-end credit plans because of the flexibility it provides to members in managing their credit and adding future loans. It is common for members who live paycheck to paycheck, or have trouble managing their money, to request a payment plan that has funds deducted from their checking account or payroll direct deposit that is credited to their loan. They may choose to have funds credited weekly, every two weeks, or twice a month. The CARD Act requirement that the account holder receive a 21-day notice prior to payment due dates (Sec. 106(b)) becomes problematic for the credit union when the member has requested anything other than monthly payments. When payment schedules occur more than monthly, we are not finding a reasonable solution that meets the 21-day notice requirement of the law. Credit unions report to our association that there are significant issues with data processors in complying with the new law. One of Missouri's smaller credit unions with $19 million in assets has approximately 1,800 open-end loans that are not credit card accounts. Making the necessary changes to comply with the Act will mean additional ongoing expense. There would be additional costs for multiple mailings including postage and staff time. If the credit union incurs additional costs to comply with the CARD Act, those increases will be passed on to our member consumers. We are also concerned that it will cause our members considerable confusion if they begin to receive multiple notices every month. Many credit unions will be impacted to the extent that they will have to offer only closed-end loans, which eliminates the convenience and flexibility that members need and prefer. If credit unions adjust all open-end credit plans to only allow one payment per month, we have taken options away from consumers that help them better manage their money. We believe that the intent of the CARD Act is to protect consumers and avoid confusing disclosures and abusive practices relative to credit card open-end programs. We do not believe that the intent was to disadvantage members and increase their costs to access open-end programs. Section 106(b) is the only place in the Act where the wording ``open end credit'' is used to broadly apply beyond credit card programs. During our meeting, we provided you with suggested language that would correct this inconsistency. It is provided below. The words in italics are currently in the bill. The bold wording in brackets is the suggested replacement. SEC. 106. Rules regarding periodic statements. (a) In General.--Section 127 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1637) is amended by adding at the end the following: (o) Due Dates for Credit Card Accounts-- (1) In general.--The payment due date for a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan shall be the same day each month. (2) Weekend or holiday due dates.--If the payment due date for a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan is a day on which the creditor does not receive or accept payments by mail (including weekends and holidays), the creditor may not treat a payment received on the next business day as late for any purpose. (b) Length of Billing Period.-- (1) In general.--Section 163 of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1666b) is amended to read as follows: SEc. 163. Timing of Payments. (a) Time to Make Payments.--A creditor may not treat a payment on an open end consumer credit plan [replace italicized wording with: ``payment on a credit card account under an open-end consumer credit plan''] as late for any purpose, unless the creditor has adopted reasonable procedures designed to ensure that each periodic statement including the information required by section 127(b) is mailed or delivered to the consumer not later than 21 days before the payment due date. (b) Grace Period.--If an open end consumer credit plan provides a time period within which an obligor may repay any portion of the credit extended without incurring an additional finance charge, such additional finance charge may not be imposed with respect to such portion of the credit extended for the billing cycle of which such period is a part, unless a statement which includes the amount upon which the finance charge for the period is based was mailed or delivered to the consumer not later than 21 days before the date specified in the statement by which payment must be made in order to avoid imposition of that finance charge. (2) Effective date.--Notwithstanding section 3, section 163 of the Truth in Lending Act, as amended by this subsection, shall become effective 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act. The 21-day notice period became law on August 20. On behalf of Missouri's 148 credit unions and their 1.3 million members, we are asking for your help in supporting a legislative solution. If we can assist with additional information on this issue, please contact me. Other contacts at the Missouri Credit Union Association regarding this issue are Peggy Nalls or Amy McLard. Sincerely, Roshara J. Holub, President/CEO. Mr. Frank of Massachusetts. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 808, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2647) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, to provide special pays and allowances to certain members of the Armed Forces, expand concurrent receipt of military retirement and VA disability benefits to disabled military retirees, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report currently under consideration.