Cliff Stearns

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise also in strong support of H. Res. 1260, supporting the goals and ideals of National Internet Safety Month. This legislation is very important, and of course, it's quite timely. I urge my colleagues obviously to support it. The Internet, as we all know, has revolutionized communications, business, and entertainment. Much of its success is due to the largely unregulated status that we have given it. Industry has done a tremendous job of deploying it, including to children, who increasingly rely on it to learn and to create things. In the United States, more than 35 million children in kindergarten through grade 12 have Internet access, and 93 percent of children between 12 and 17 years old use the Internet. But just like any other technology, it is sometimes used by bad people to do bad things. Recent studies show that sexual predators, cyber bullies, cyber stalkers, and identity thieves represent very real online dangers for children of all ages. According to the Crimes Against Children Research Center, 22 percent of people targeted by online predators were children with ages between 10 and 13. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reports 25 percent of children say they've received unwanted sexual material while simply surfing the Internet. The Identity Theft Resource Center reports that children are the newest target for identity theft, since they can be easily persuaded to divulge personal information, and the crime is unlikely to be discovered until the victim is much older. As these numbers demonstrate, Internet safety should be of paramount concern to all of us. Furthermore, these statistics highlight why online safety education is so very important. By arming parents and children with the information, we can go a long way to avoiding some of the pitfalls out there on the Internet and obviously maximize its benefits. That's why I support National Internet Safety Month and this resolution, and I urge its support. I reserve the balance of my time. General Leave

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. faces a critical need to encourage domestic petroleum production. It seems as if the United States has unilaterally disarmed itself in the competition for energy supplies by imposing a host of unnecessary restrictions on domestic oil and energy production. Indeed, in the past three decades, we've thwarted construction of refineries and nuclear power plants that could have helped to ease the competition for energy supply and that could have secured greater energy independence for all of us. Further, taxes on the major domestic oil producers lower incentives for new investments, and they add more costs to finished products at the pump. Furthermore, there is growing doubt that the recent rush to develop corn-based ethanol and other alternative and renewable energy sources will bring genuine relief or true energy security. By creating a bonanza for corn growers and agribusiness giants, we have succeeded in driving up food prices both in the United States and abroad. American families deserve better from the Democrat-controlled Congress.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Good morning, Madam Speaker. A question for all of us: Why would the most powerful economy in the world leave so much of its own energy sources untapped? Alone among all the countries, the United States has placed a substantial amount of its oil and natural gas potential off limits. Other countries have the potential to drill just off their shores, but United States' firms face strict restrictions on drilling in most offshore areas even as American drivers face sharply higher prices at the gas pump. Domestic oil and gas production has failed to keep pace with the growing demand both domestically and abroad, but it's not because we're not lacking for domestic energy. Since the 1990s, the Federal Government has placed severe restrictions on new energy development, particularly in some of our most promising areas. As this graph shows, Congress has placed over 85 percent of our Outer Continental Shelf off limits. Back then, oil and natural gas were cheap, and the need for additional energy was not considered significant. Also, the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil tanker spill led to the heightened environmental concerns about offshore energy production. Environmental concerns took precedence over future economic considerations. Soon, access to 85 percent of federally controlled offshore areas had been restricted, including the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and portions of the area off the shores of Alaska and off the eastern Gulf of Mexico. No one knows how much energy lies in those areas, but many agree there is enough to bring stability to energy markets and to make a real difference in oil and natural gas prices for many years to come. According to a recent Interior Department study, restricted offshore areas are known to contain--and this is a fact--15 billion barrels of oil and 60 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, but literally, when they go to estimate beyond the hard facts, the estimate goes up to 86 billion barrels of oil and even higher and to 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, enough oil to replace all of our imports for the next 27 years at current rates. In fact, it may be even higher given that most of the off-limit areas have not been thoroughly explored. New technology and what we estimate based upon the 1980s is probably not correct. Our policies need to catch up with our times. Oil and natural gas prices have tripled since the 1990s. Demand continues to increase by a steady 1.5 percent per year. Imports have increased. Political stability in oil-producing nations has decreased. Domestic production has flattened, all while our ability to extract resources without environmental damage has increased dramatically. With all of this energy out there, with demands at all-time highs and with prices remaining high, what has taken so long? The biggest problem has been environmental concerns, being worried about a spill. What would it do to the tourist industry, for example, in the gulf coast areas? The National Academy of Sciences says, ``Improved production technology and safety training of personnel have dramatically reduced both blowouts and daily operational spills.'' The danger of such spills has been greatly reduced. Of the more than 7 billion barrels of oil pumped offshore in the past 25 years, 0.001 percent--that is one thousandth of 1 percent--has been spilled. In fact, even during Katrina and Rita, during winds that reached 170 miles per hour and during lashing waves that took out a quarter of America's domestic energy production, no significant spills were reported. Furthermore, Cuba wants to let the Chinese drill in some of the very parts of the gulf that American producers are forbidden to touch, some as close as 45 miles off the Florida coast. Do we truly believe the environmental safeguards of Chinese energy firms are better than ours? It's time we stop assuming that all energy exploration is bad. Most takes place too far from the coast to be seen, and we haven't even had a spill from offshore drilling in over 40 years, neither has Canada, which permits drilling off its Atlantic and Pacific coasts and in the Great Lakes where some rigs are closer to U.S. shores than American producers are permitted to drill. Madam Speaker, America's energy problems are partially self-imposed, and that needs to end. Congress overreacted in the 1990s, and it needs to undo that damage. Our need for affordable energy will not decrease, and the time has come to lift the restrictions on offshore energy production and to let U.S. producers do what they can do to meet our growing energy demands. It's time for this Congress to get serious about bridging the growing gap between supply and demand. Opening the Outer Continental Shelf to environmentally sound exploration could be just the way to do it.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. A new Gallup Poll shows that 57 percent of Americans agree with House Republicans and favor more energy exploration in the United States. America needs fewer restrictions on domestic sources of oil. The U.S. remains the only oil-producing nation that has placed a substantial amount of its energy potential off limits. This includes just 100th of 1 percent of Alaska's 20-million Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This small portion of ANWR is believed to contain 10 billion barrels of oil, or more, an amount equivalent to 15 years of imports from Saudi Arabia or 30 years of imports from Hugo Chavez. The Congressional Research Service estimates that at $1.25 a barrel, ANWR would deliver $192 billion in corporate income tax and royalty revenue to the Federal Government. Even more oil is located in other restricted areas throughout the United States, and still more, Mr. Speaker, in the 85 percent of America's Outer Continental Shelf, that is currently off-limits. We need to favor more exploration.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, according to the Energy Information Agency, the United States currently imports 60 percent of its oil, and that number is expected to rise to 75 percent in the coming decades. As a country, we need to reduce our dependency on foreign fuel sources and start implementing alternative energy sources that can be found here in the United States. Imported fuels such as crude oil and natural gas are costing this country millions of dollars a year, accounting for about one-third of the U.S. trade deficit. At $45 a barrel, liquid coal fuel is a desirable alternative to the $120 or more barrel of oil. Not only does this innovative fuel cost less, but also coal is one of the most abundant resources in our country. As Congress continues to explore the use of alternative energy sources, we need to look closely at the enormous benefits of coal-to- liquid technology.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, the War in Iraq has been difficult for all Americans. I understand and share the American people's frustration at how the war has been conducted. No one wants to bring our troops home more than I do, but conditions on the ground should dictate when our troops should leave, not domestic politics. Regardless of if you voted for the war or against it or support immediate withdrawal or not, there is one issue we can all agree. Our brave men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve our respect and admiration. The best way to honor them is to provide them with all the necessary equipment to be safe and successful as quickly as possible. One thing our troops do not deserve is to be used as a political bargaining chip for additional billions in unrelated and unnecessary spending. Unfortunately, that is what the Democrat leadership has done with the bill before us today. By playing politics, Democrats are ensuring that the troops will not get their funding prior to Memorial Day. Our troops do not deserve this kind of treatment. This is an insult to our men and women who put their lives on the line to protect our freedom. This is most unfortunate because the first amendment, which I urge all my colleagues to support, contains funding for some very vital programs. For example, it includes $75 million in FY 2008 and $300 million in FY 2009 for traumatic brain injury care and research. In addition, the measure provides $95 million to address gaps identified by the President's Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors. The funding is designed to improve case management, data sharing, and the disability evaluation system. These, among others, are very critical to our troops and their families. They deserved to be enacted, not held up for petty political reasons. Certainly mistakes have been made in Iraq and a change of strategy was long overdue. Now that the surge has been fully implemented and been given time to work, there is no doubt that the security environment in Iraq continues to improve. General Petraeus has said that security progress is still fragile and reversible. Much work still needs to be done, but progress on the ground is undeniable. The question we must continually ask ourselves is what is the cost of withdrawing our troops? Should the U.S. immediately pull out of Iraq, leave the terrorists emboldened and potentially put more Americans at risk? Withdrawal needs to be based on events not politics. It is important to stress that an open-ended American military commitment is both unwise and dangerous. Progress in Iraq must be measurable, enforced and based on more than just military progress. Accordingly, Col. Christopher Hughes, who commanded the 2d Battalion of the 327th Inf. Regiment, 101st Airborne in Iraq, has identified a set of strategic benchmarks deigned to measure progress in Iraq. Col. Hughes has developed an event-driven sequence that leads to a legitimate withdrawal. His plan includes six phases and a number of different benchmarks that need to be met. I have attached this plan and make it part of my speech. It's important to highlight that events, not an arbitrary timeline, needs to guide our strategy. Col. Hughes' milestones for an event- driven withdrawal are strategic, operational and tactical. Such benchmarks include, holding insurgent violence less than or equal to one attack on Coalition and Iraqi forces per month, having 76 operational oil refineries and producing 4.5 million barrels of oil per day. I ask unanimous consent to include in the Congressional Record Col. Hughes' full strategy for leaving Iraq. The amendment we have before us today does not take an event-driven approach, but sets an arbitrary deadline based on politics not the situation on the ground. I urge my colleagues to vote against the second amendment today. In addition, Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to talk about a provision in the third amendment pertaining to the Montgomery GI Bill. As a veteran and a senior member of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, I understand the hardship and sacrifice of military service. I, along with many of my colleagues, have supported legislation to update and expand the GI Bill, and I am cosponsoring H.R. 5740, the legislation that this provision is based on. However, the House leadership decided to combine the updated GI Bill with a huge tax increase on many small businesses. The Democrat tax increase would put a surcharge on the gross income for individuals earning more than $500,000 and couples with over $1 million. However, of taxpayers with $1 million or more in income, nearly 83% report that some or all of that is income from a small business. This is a massive tax increase on the gross income of small businessmen and women who operate as self-employed individuals. They are the primary source of new jobs in our nation. Instead of raising taxes, Congress could fund the new GI Bill by reducing federal spending by a mere 0.1 percent over 10 years. I am certain that we can find one- tenth of one percent of wasteful federal spending and apply that to meeting the needs of our 21st century veterans. In addition, the third amendment includes $5.8 billion in FY 2009 funds for levee rebuilding in Louisiana. This is in addition to the $7.1 billion the federal government has already provided to repair and enhance levees. Furthermore, $9.9 billion for foreign aid is included, which represents $500 million more than requested. These may very well be worthwhile programs but do they belong in an emergency, off budget spending package? Lastly, I want to point out that the process of how this bill came to the floor today is not in keeping with the spirit and traditions of the House. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated in her 2006 document, A New Direction for America, ``bills should be developed following full hearings and open subcommittee and committee markups, with appropriate referrals to other committees.'' The Speaker went on to state that, ``bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, and fair debate consisting of a full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives, including a substitute.'' Furthermore, according to The Politico newspaper, ``There have been about three dozen emergency spending bills in the past 20 years, and a handful have passed without input from the Appropriations Committee, including billions in Hurricane Katrina aid and post-Sept. 11 funds. But none of the Iraq war funding bills have bypassed the Appropriations panel.'' Unfortunately, this supplemental bypassed the entire Appropriations Committee process altogether, and through the use of parliamentary gimmicks, avoids the input of both Democrat and Republican members who have real expertise in the subject areas involved, effectively shutting out the views of millions of these members' constituents. To have the Democrat leadership cut off the people's right to be heard by such crass parliamentary maneuvers results hi great harm to the appropriations process and seriously undermines the credibility of the House of Representatives. Our brave troops and millions of veterans deserve better. They do not deserve to be treated as political tools. We pass a clean supplemental, devoid of any unrelated, and unnecessary spending, that gets necessary equipment to our troops on the battlefield immediately . We should also pass a GI Bill that doe not unfairly tax small businesses. Unfortunately, the Democrat leadership decided to play politics, while our troops and veterans have to pay the price. Appendix I: A Strategy for Leaving Iraq

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to first state that it was a pleasure, in my former capacity as Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, to work with my good friend from Illinois, Chairman Rush, in crafting this important legislation. H.R. 4040, the Consumer Product Safety Commission Reform Act, will greatly enhance the ability of the CPSC to secure the proper funding and sufficient number of employees to ensure that the products we import from abroad and manufacture here at home will not harm those who purchase them. Millions of Americans are concerned with the safety of toys and other children's products due to lead contamination found in millions of toys imported from China. I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for coming together and taking action to safeguard consumers from lead exposure, and to provide the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) with the tools and funding it needs to safeguard the public. The House on December 19, 2007, overwhelmingly approved H.R. 4040, a bill that will change current law and add more stringent lead paint and lead content standards, making them the toughest in the world. It also requires testing of children's products in accredited labs, and tracking labels on all children's products. Furthermore, the bill authorizes increased funding for the CPSC to hire more personnel, creation of a new state-of-the-art laboratory, and the institution of an expedited release of information on health safety risks to the public. All of which will make the CPSC more effective. The House Committee on Energy and Commerce worked tirelessly to produce this bipartisan legislation and I now ask my colleagues to vote ``Yes'' on this Motion to Instruct conferees and support this bipartisan House passed legislation and call for this bill to remain unchanged through the conference negotiations with the Senate.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, on May 7th, Dmitri Medvedev was sworn in as the new Russian President. It remains to be seen if he will be more than just a puppet controlled by Prime Minister Putin, but if the President's victory speech is any indication, we should expect a ``direct continuation'' of Putin's iron-fisted policies. As Russia desires to regain its stance as a major world power, rest assured Putin and Medvedev will stop at nothing to achieve this. As Americans, we should be wary of Putin's legacy of government corruption, diminished democracy, and antagonistic stance toward its former Soviet neighbors and the West. Although there may be opportunities for the U.S. to re-engage with Russia under Medvedev, we must proceed with caution. Let us not forgot that there are Iranian enrichment facilities in Russia, and that Russia uses its oil and gas resources to manipulate and control its sovereign neighbors. These are the characteristics of an emerging dictatorship hiding beneath the mask of democracy.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 2419, a $289 billion bill which will subsidize wealthy farmers and agribusiness, increase welfare benefits, violate pay-go rules, and will not dent our current energy needs, all paid for by the American taxpayer. Folks, this country is facing an impending entitlement crisis. In the next few years millions of baby boomers will begin to retire and begin collecting Social Security and Medicare benefits. However, the Congressional Budget Office projects that Social Security will begin to pay out more in benefits than it takes in payroll taxes by 2020, and Medicare spending, that is already 13 percent of our Nations budget, will double over the next 10 years. Yet, this Democrat lead Congress sees fit to grant farm subsidies to farmers who are making up to $2.5 million in income per year. As crop prices soar, American farm incomes are achieving record highs. Since enactment of the last farm bill in 2002, key crop prices have grown as much as 281 percent, and total farm income has more than doubled. More and more farmers are now multimillionaires. With $20 billion in increased spending, this bill irresponsibly wastes taxpayer dollars by subsidizing an industry whose profits are soaring. The evidence is clear; the Department of Agriculture estimates that the 2007 farm income was $87.5 billion, which totals a 48 percent increase from the previous year's level of $59 billion. The search for alternative energy sources is vital to our country's national and economic security. However, this farm bill will extend tax and tariff subsidies for ethanol, while keeping in place the Federal ethanol mandate. This has directly resulted in the price of a bushel of corn in this country to triple and has failed to ease our energy crisis. The ethanol mandate to produce alternative energy has pushed up the prices not only of corn, but also of crops such as soybeans that have been abandoned by many farmers during this current corn-planting bonanza. Despite these steep price increases, large subsidies for these crops will continue under this wasteful bill and rising food costs will continue to be thrown upon our citizens. I support our country's farmers and agree that a Federal farm program should be in place to alleviate farming poverty. However, with crop prices rising to record-breaking levels, and farm incomes doubling over the past 7 years, I cannot support a bill that seeks to subsidize multimillionaire farmers on the backs of tax paying Americans.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, efforts by Americans and our allies in Iraq have greatly weakened al Qaeda. If we withdraw our troops from Iraq before their mission is complete, we would forfeit all the progress we have made so far. Since the surge began last year, we have made remarkable progress, both on the military front and on the political front. While we all agree that more needs to be done politically, there is no questioning the tremendous efforts our military have done to bring stability to areas once controlled by radical extremists. There should be absolutely no question of whether we provide them the funding they need to do the job we've asked them to do. House Republicans stand united with our troops and our veterans who have fought bravely on the front lines. The least we can do is front the resources necessary for them to complete the task we sent our military to do. We cannot delay, and we should provide this supplemental funding without extra new spending and extra new programs before we leave for Memorial Day.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, Iraq's oil revenue is projected to be a record $70 billion this year, according to a report set to be released today from the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. The cost of Iraqi oil has skyrocketed in recent years up 250 percent since 2003. With these soaring oil revenues, the time is now for the Iraqi government to take greater responsibility for the security and reconstruction of their country and begin the process of weaning themselves off the largesse of the United States of America. Recently, Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, announced that he was cutting $171 million in Pentagon funding for a police station construction in Iraq. This is a good first step towards ensuring that the Iraqi government understands that they need to show a real and sustained commitment to taking control of their country's destiny. By spending some of their record oil revenues, the Iraqis can send a definitive statement that they are serious about investing in their own future.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, in 2006 the world was alarmed when North Korea tested a nuclear device. Since then, North Korea has been pressured to reveal details about its nuclear program, but it has blatantly defied transparency deadlines and Six-Party talks have yielded few results. North Korea has recently re-declared its intent to provide a ``complete and correct'' declaration of all its nuclear programs, but while the U.S. awaits this declaration, we shouldn't reduce the necessary pressure required to hold North Korea accountable to its promises. The U.S. should not ease sanctions on North Korea until we have sufficient verification measures in place. Specifically, North Korea should not be removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism until it accurately declares the number of nuclear weapons and the amount of fissile material it has. We must continue to insist on full transparency and not acquiesce to deceitful North Korean rhetoric.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor an organization in my district in Leesburg, Florida, that is making a difference for the people of Florida. Florida's Hometown U.S.A. was formed to instill in Florida's youth the value of volunteer service. Students from across the State are selected each year to participate in the program. Each year five students are selected from elementary school to high school as participants. The volunteers' focus is on helping children and the elderly by providing food, clothes, personal care items, and assistance wherever it is needed. Each year the organization holds its Florida Hometown U.S.A. pageant, which serves as its main fundraiser. Florida's Hometown U.S.A. program has received recognition for the positive impact and outcome it has achieved in the local communities. I want to congratulate these fine young volunteers, especially the fine young students who are selected every year, and especially program director Linda Watts, for all she has done over the past 22 years. She has enhanced the community of Leesburg which I represent. Thank you, Linda, for all of your hard work. Keep up your hard work for the program, and God bless you.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 175, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute provides groundbreaking biomedical and clinical research, high quality educational programs, and effective outreach and outstanding patient care to the Washington, DC, area; and Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute seeks to understand why certain cancers disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, and to eliminate cancer disparities among minority citizens in the District; and Whereas the GW Cancer Institute's Executive Director Dr. Steven Patierno cochaired the AACR-MICR, American Association for Cancer Research and Minorities in Cancer Research, national conference titled, ``The Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial and Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved''; and Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute is working to uncover genetic clues that help explain cancer disparities through a grant awarded by the National Cancer Institute's Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities to establish a Genomics of Cancer Disparities Center; and Whereas the GW Cancer Institute offers an Office of Cancer Prevention and Control, an Office of Cancer Education and Outreach and an Office of Cancer Survivorship; Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute offers resources to citizens in the form of advocacy, support groups, education, outreach and clinical care; Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute leads the Community-by-Community Cancer Control Campaign aimed at decreasing the cancer burden of Washington, DC; Whereas, nearly 40 area churches participate in the GWCI's congregational cancer wellness initiative; Whereas, the GWCI served as a founding member and leader of the DC Cancer Consortium; Whereas the GW Cancer Institute's Dr. Paul Levine cochairs the Early Detection Subcommittee of the DC Cancer Consortium and Dr. Donald Henson serves as cochair of the DC Cancer Consortium; Whereas the GW Cancer Institute, together with the GW Medical Faculty Associates, operates the GW Mammovan which offers digital mammography to more than 2,500 women per year; Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute partners with local Washington DC based sports teams including the Washington Redskins and Washington Nationals, offering free prostate cancer screenings; Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute works with local, Washington DC media partners, reaching thousands with messages about the importance of getting screened for prostate, breast and colorectal cancer. Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute, working with the GW Medical Faculty Associates, has conducted free prostate cancer screenings for over 2000 men in 18 months, including nearly 700 DC area men at the 15th Annual NBC4 Health and Fitness Expo at the Washington, DC, Convention Center; Whereas the GW Cancer Institute's Outreach Program works with barbershops in DC's Wards 4, 7 and 8 offering an outreach program in which lay health workers are trained in prostate cancer education and relay information to customers about the importance of early detection; Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute recognizes leaders in the field every year at the annual GW Cancer Institute Gala; Whereas, past GW Cancer Institute Gala recipients have included Carolyn R. ``Bo'' Aldige, the American Cancer Society, Lance Armstrong, Ray Michael Bridgewater, Zora Brown, Margaret M. Bush, Sam Donaldson, Andrew C. von Eschenbach, MD, First Lady of the Republic of Panama Vivian Fernandez de Torrijos, Harold P. Freeman, MD, Elmer Huerta, MD, LaSalle D. Leffall Jr., MD, FACS, the Honorable Connie Mack and Mrs. Priscilla Mack, Michael Milken, Nueva Vida, and Ellen Sigal, PhD; Whereas, the GW Cancer Institute will honor Margaret Foti, MD, PhD, Robert Siegel, MD and Mrs. Paula Siegel, RN; Sean Swarner, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu on May 3, 2008. Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the U.S. House of Representatives-- (1) honors and salutes the accomplishments of the GW Cancer Institute and recognizes its important work throughout the Washington, DC area; (2) recognizes the accomplishments and achievements of the GW Cancer Institute in research and community outreach; and (3) based upon the Institute's service, extends its appreciation to The George Washington University Cancer Institute in recognition of its Fifth Annual GW Cancer Institute Gala.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, according to the Energy Information Agency, the United States imports about 60 percent of its oil today and that number is expected to go up to almost 80 percent in the next 10 years. As a country, we need to reduce our dependency on foreign fuel sources and start implementing alternative energy sources and programs that can be found here in the United States, like coal. Imported fuel such as crude oil and natural gas are costing the country millions of dollars a year and accounts for about one-third of the United States trade deficit. Imported fuels also account for about 17 percent of an increase in America's energy consumption from 2004 to 2005. Now liquid coal can be developed for $50 a barrel. Compare that with $107 for oil today. Not only does this innovative fuel cost us less, but also coal is one of the most abundant natural resources in the United States. As Congress continues to explore the use of alternative energy sources, we need to look closely at coal to liquid.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor the contributions of High Springs Farmers Market, which is in my congressional district. It was established in 2001. The market provides local growers with an opportunity to sell their products directly to consumers and to provide area residents with high quality, fresh produce and other farm products at affordable prices. This market then has encouraged and assisted local residents to grow fresh produce through a community garden program, and it provides training and entrepreneurial opportunities for the new growers. By promoting local Florida products, this market allows traditional farmers to sell in today's competitive market. In addition, the High Spring Farmers Market is the first and only market in the State of Florida to accept food stamps, providing high- quality, fresh food to those who otherwise could not afford it. I am grateful for the market's dedication to the entrepreneurial spirit and am proud to have it in my district. Congratulations to them and keep up the great work.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, like many of my colleagues, I'm a big sports fan. I have had the opportunity to play sports in high school and in an industrial league. I played it in the Boys Club back in 90- pound football. And I think, like most of us, we understand that the vast majority of stars today were a testament to true hard work. They were determined to succeed and often times under difficult situations. Their performances, victories, records and careers seemed to capture the straightforwardness of honesty, hard work and integrity that is based upon the heart of sports today, at least in the past, the ideal that sports allow success based upon merit, whether it be on the court, the field or the track. Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, the scourge of steroids and performance-enhancing drugs is not simply a footnote in the history of sports in America. Steroid use goes much deeper, to the basic integrity of sports and all of athletics. At the most fundamental level, steroid use is just plain cheating. And furthermore, it is illegal. Steroids are classified as a Schedule III controlled substance under the Controlled Substance Act. Those caught in illegal possession of steroids without a prescription face arrest and prosecution. Dealers face a Federal felony charge and up to 5 years in prison. Furthermore, steroid use involves significant health risks for all athletes who use them. Studies suggest that use of steroids can lead to stunted growth in adolescents, increased risk of heart and liver disease, as well as cancer and hormonal problems for both men and women. And that is why these and other factors demand that our elite athletic organizations, both professional and amateur, establish uniform, world-class drug testing standards that are consistent and robust, just as our criminal laws are today. However, the most worrisome development is that steroids are not only infiltrating their professional and elite amateur leagues, they are finding their way into middle schools and high school sports programs. In fact, according to the most recent Monitoring for the Future survey, funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, 3\1/2\ percent of high school seniors have used steroids with similar percentages for grades 8-10. These are alarming numbers that represent just a part of the susceptible youth population that is out there. These estimates suggest that the high school steroid problem is just as great, if not greater, than it is in the professional leagues. As any parent knows, high school is a trying time for many kids, let alone student athletes. These exceptional kids now face yet another hazard all the way to adulthood, that is trying to claim the safe haven of sports as its next growth market. We must take an aggressive stand against this plague before these pressures lead young student athletes to use steroids, its destructive effects on honesty and fair play and ultimately, their very health and well-being. And here and before the Commerce Trade and Consumer Protection Subcommittee last year, which I chaired in the last Congress, we heard testimony from a parent of a young man who tragically took his own life when that pressure to succeed, coupled with steroids, became too much. Unfortunately, these tragic stories are all too common. Richard Pound, the founder and chair of the World Anti-Doping Agency says, ``Do we want our children to be forced to become drug addicts in order to be successful in sports? Like it or not, sports stars are heroes and idols to our kids. Our kids copy their heroes' behavior. That's why we have to encourage the stars to be good role models both on and off the field.'' Congress must continue to look into the use of illegal steroid and performance enhancing drug use. Professional leagues have an obligation to be the gold standard with regard to education, detection and sanctions for the illicit use of steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs. The recent scandals in baseball, the Olympics, professional wrestling and in other professional amateur sports have served to highlight the significance of the steroids problem. Now, sometimes I'm asked back in the district why I care about drugs in sports. Shouldn't the athletes perhaps do whatever they want? They are only hurting themselves, is the reply. The use of steroids and performance-enhancing drugs by athletes today goes beyond just the integrity of the sport. By using illegal drugs, athletes are, in effect, telling our children that the only way to be successful and compete at the highest level is to cheat. That is not the message I want our children to hear.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, the bipartisan Protect America Act, a critical anti-terrorist law that closes loopholes in our intelligence laws and protects civil liberties is, once again, about to expire. The House must act today on this critical piece of legislation, which passed the Senate by 68-29. If this Senate bill is not passed in time, our intelligence agencies will be blinded to our enemies' plans and required to consult a lawyer before eavesdropping on foreign terrorists. Democrats have had more than 6 months to make the Protect America Act permanent and provide immunity to telecommunications firms that assisted our government and performed their patriotic duty after 9/11. The time for indecision and second-guessing is over. The time to get this important legislation passed into law is today. House Democrats should pass the Senate bill and get it to the President, again, today.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume. I also rise today in support of H. Res. 963, supporting the goals and ideals of National Salute to Hospitalized Veterans Week, and for other purposes. I would like to thank my colleagues Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Miller of Florida for sponsoring this timely piece of legislation. The President has designated this week, February 11 through 15, as National Salute to Hospitalized Veterans Week. This week provides the American people the opportunity to thank a special group of men and women, the more than 98,000 veterans of the United States Armed Forces, who are cared for every day by the Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers, outpatient clinics, domicilaries, and nursing homes across this Nation. Mr. Speaker, this resolution specifically shows the support of the United States House of Representatives for the National Salute to Hospitalized Veterans Program and its efforts to pay tribute to and express appreciation for these hospitalized veterans. The resolution also seeks to increase community awareness of the role of VA medical centers, and to encourage citizens to visit hospitalized veterans and become involved as volunteers. The resolution also encourages citizens who live near a VA hospital or clinic to just take time to visit and thank our veterans personally. During my visits with veterans at the Gainesville, Florida VA Medical Center and my trip this past year to Ramstein to visit the troops at the hospital, I have also been inspired by the courage and honor that is displayed by these heroes. You will walk away feeling a whole lot better than when you came in, because you're so proud of what they've done. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this resolution assures our Nation's veterans that we in Congress will continue to work with veterans service organizations to support our veterans with words, actions, and financial assistance. Again, Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 963. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, let me conclude and extend my thanks to Chairman Filner and Ranking Member Buyer for not just bringing this resolution to the House floor but also the two previous bills. These reinforce Congress' commitment to serving America's veterans. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. General Leave

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise also in strong support for H.R. 4169, which would authorize the placement in Arlington National Cemetery of an American Braille tactile flag honoring blind members of the Armed Forces, veterans and other Americans. My colleagues, our Nation's veterans have fought for our freedom, many at the expense of their health and well-being. Some of our veterans have not just lost use of an arm or a leg as a consequence of service, but now live in darkness from the loss of their sight. In order to serve the needs of blind Americans, the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute created and designed a tactile American flag in Braille which would enable these blind veterans and other blind Americans the simple ability to see through the use of their hands the beauty of our American flag. The flag has been specifically designed in a way that informs the blind of the full color of the American flag, 13 stripes and 50 stars on the blue field. Additionally, the tactile flag bears the Pledge of Allegiance in both raised print and grade one Braille. It is a plaque. It is not a traditional flag. Mr. Speaker, I offer my full support of this great bill, the American Braille Flag Memorial Act. By placing the Braille American flag at Arlington National Cemetery, we do indeed bring honor to our Nation's blind veterans community and allow our blind veterans to see the American flag.

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to again congratulate my colleague from Kansas for introducing this bill. It clearly shows a special sense of sensitivity to the needs of disabled veterans. I commend my distinguished colleague for doing this and for the support of the institute for their offering this to the government at the Arlington National Cemetery. Again, it is a lot of hard work by Mr. Tiahrt, and I commend him. I urge my colleagues to support and pass this bill, H.R. 4169. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. STEARNS

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