Cliff Stearns

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate both the University of Florida's Men's and Women's Tennis teams on claiming the South Eastern Conference's Tournament Titles. The second-seeded and fifth-ranked University of Florida men's tennis team won the SEC tournament for the third time in school history, as the Gators defeated fifth-seeded and 26th ranked Tennessee on Sunday, April 24, 2005 at the Dan Magill Tennis Complex in Athens, GA. With the victory, the Men's team moved to 20-5 on the year and earned the SEC's automatic invitation to the NCAA Championships marking their 15th consecutive trip. Likewise, the University of Florida women's tennis team staged an unbelievable comeback rallying to win its 4th consecutive and 14th overall SEC Tournament title with a 4-2 victory over third-ranked Kentucky, Sunday afternoon at the Alabama Tennis Stadium. I congratulate both of Florida's Men's and Women's tennis teams on their SEC tournament title and wish them much luck as they head into the NCAA Tournament!

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow is Asthma Awareness Day. I rise to celebrate the October 2003 enacted Asthmatic Students Treatment and Health Management Act, ASTHMA. It is now Public Law 108-377 and was H.R. 2023 in the House and the Senate bill was S. 2815. I introduced this with the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy), and Senator Enzi and Senator Kennedy carried the mantle there. Mr. Speaker, this law provides incentives for States to pass favorable laws that guarantee that students can carry and use prescribed medicine and anaphylaxis medications while in school. It is not a mandate, and incurs no new spending. The idea has been germinating since the early 1990s and has been building momentum since. On Asthma Awareness Day, May 7, 2003, there were only 20 asthma- friendly States in our United States. Even more limiting, of these 20, only nine extended that protection even further to anaphylaxis medication like epinephrine auto-injectors. Today, according to the Allergy and Asthma Network, Mothers of Asthmatics, we have a strong number of 41 States protecting for asthma, 26 for asthma plus anaphylaxis, and four have legislation pending for both conditions. Four that have asthma laws have legislation pending for anaphylaxis, and there is one State just getting started and has legislation that is pending for asthma anaphylaxis-carrying students. Mr. Speaker, this is a dramatic upswing for our children. I am especially proud to report what is going on in Florida. Florida has been an inhaler-friendly State for years, but now there is legislation pending to include epinephrine auto-injectors. My friend and constituent, Dr. Karl Altenberger, an allergist in Ocala, Florida, has been active in advancing this for his patients in the Florida State legislature. He is to be commended. This bill passed last week and is ready for the Governor's signature. Just yesterday, the Orlando Sentinel reported ``Girl fights for allergy law as lives depend on it.'' In Celebration, a central Florida town, lives 9-year-old Kelsey Ryan. ``Severely allergic to peanuts, she has never known life without her EpiPen. The dose of adrenaline inside could save her life and is with her at all times: in classrooms, on field trips, and during school activities. Now Kelsey has been urging Tallahassee lawmakers to pass a bill that would allow the estimated 100,000 Florida school children with life-threatening allergies the same access to this EpiPen. Kelsey has testified before four Tallahassee committees since February, meeting lawmakers and passing out practice injectors urging them to pass the bill. We might call Kelsey a true respiration inspiration. She shares a quote, ``My mom told me in some schools, there are children like myself who need the EpiPen with them, but it is locked far away in the clinic.'' She told the committee that if someone needed their EpiPen, it might not get to them in time. Kelsey's charisma and dedication led legislators in Tallahassee to rename H.B. 279 the Kelsey Ryan Act. More than 60 State legislators cosponsored the bill which the House passed earlier this month 114 to 0. The Senate passed it last week, and it is on the desk of Governor Jeb Bush. Brenda Olson, director of governmental affairs for the American Lung Association of Florida points out that ``most schools in Florida do not allow students to carry the EpiPen.'' As we have been saying for years, ``Moments count when these reactions start.'' Kelsey's mother, Blair Ryan, emphasized another point we made in our bill, H.R. 2023, that this is a team effort between the student, the parents, the physician, and the school. If a parent and physician believe that a student is mature and competent to treat him or herself, a school should not impede this medical regimen, but help it work for the student. Currently, school districts across Florida have different policies on this matter, and some may well not serve a student who just accidentally got stung by a bee or ate a cookie with an unknown walnut. Officials in Volusia and Orange counties said the majority of EpiPen are kept locked in school clinics. This is disastrous for the student's health and potentially a lawsuit on the school. In conclusion, I am pleased with the strong progress on this issue here in our Nation's Capitol and in the State houses. I invite everyone to join us in the Cannon Caucus Room tomorrow at 11:30 a.m. for a congressional briefing followed by free asthma screenings and asthma health clinics and exhibits from 1 to 3:30 p.m. This year, Asthma Awareness Day is truly a breath of fresh air. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, is Asthma Awareness Day and I rise to celebrate the October 2003-enacted Asthmatic Students Treatment and Health Management Act (ASTHMA). What is now P.l. 108-377, and was H.R. 2023 in the House and S. 2815 in the Senate, I had introduced on 2003's Asthma Awareness Day with my friend Representative Patrick Kennedy from Rhode Island. In the Senate, Senator Enzi and Senator Kennedy carried the mantel. This law provides incentives for States to pass favorable laws guaranteeing that students can carry and use prescribed asthma and anaphylaxis (anna full AXE iss) medications while at school. It is not a mandate, and it incurs no new spending. This idea has been germinating since the late 1990s, and has been building momentum since. On Asthma Awareness Day, May 7, 2003, there were only 20 ``asthma- friendly'' States. Even more limiting, of these 20 only 9 extended that protection even further to anaphylaxis (anna full AXE iss) medication, like epinephrine auto-injectors. Today, according to the Allergy and Asthma Network, Mothers of Asthmatics, a grand-slam of 41 States protect for asthma, 26 for asthma plus anaphylaxis, 4 have legislation pending for both conditions, 4 that already have asthma laws have legislation pending for anaphylaxis, and 1 State is just getting started and has legislation pending for asthma. This is a dramatic upswing for our children. I am especially proud to report what is going on in Florida. Florida has been inhaler-friendly for years, but now there is legislation pending to include epinephrine auto-injectors. My friend and constituent Karl Altenberger, MD, an allergist in Ocala, FL has been active on advancing this for his patients for years in the Florida State legislature. The bill passed last week and is ready for the Governor. Just yesterday (May 2nd), the Orlando Sentinel reported that ``Girl fights for allergy law as if lives depend on it.'' In Celebration, a central Florida town, lives 9-year-old Kelsey Ryan. ``Severely allergic to peanuts, (she) has never known life without her EpiPen. The dose of adrenaline inside could save her life and is with her at all times: in her classroom, on field trips and during after-school activities. Now Kelsey has been urging Tallahassee lawmakers to pass a bill that would allow the estimated 100,000 Florida schoolchildren with life- threatening allergies the same access to their EpiPens--also known as epinephrine auto-injectors. Kelsey has testified before four Tallahassee committees since February, meeting lawmakers and passing out practice injectors with tags urging them to pass the bill.'' We might call Kelsey a true respiration inspiration. She shares that ``My mom told me that in some other schools there's children like myself who need their EpiPen with them, but it's locked up far away in the clinic,'' Kelsey told one committee. ``If they somehow needed their EpiPen, it might not get to them in time.'' Kelsey's ``charisma and dedication led legislators in Tallahassee to rename H.B. 279 the ``Kelsey Ryan Act.'' More than 60 State representatives co-sponsored the bill, which the House passed earlier this month 114-0. The Senate passed it last week and it is on the desk of Governor Jeb Bush. Brenda Olsen, director of governmental affairs for the American Lung Association of Florida, points out that ``Most schools in the State of Florida do not allow students to carry their EpiPens,'' and, as we have been saying for years, ``Moments count when these reactions start.'' Kelsey's mother, Blair Ryan, emphasizes another point we made in H.R. 2003: This is a ``team effort'' between the student, the parents, the physician, and the school. If a parent and physician believe that a student is mature and competent to treat him or herself, a school should not impede this medical regimen, but help it work for the student. Currently, school districts across Florida vary on their policies, and some may not well-serve a student who just accidentally got stung by a bee, or ate a cookie with an unknown walnut. In the Sentinel article, officials in Volusia and Orange counties said the majority of EpiPens are kept locked in school clinics. This could prove to be just disastrous, for the student's health, and potentially as a lawsuit to the school. I am pleased with the strong momentous progress of this issue here in our Nation's capital and in our statehouses. I invite everyone to join us in the Cannon Caucus room tomorrow at 11:30 a.m. for a Congressional Briefing, followed by free asthma screenings and asthma health exhibits from 1-2:30 p.m. This year's Asthma Awareness Day is truly a breath of fresh air.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, the AARP has publicly denounced any plans to reform Social Security that might include personal savings retirement accounts. They have taken out full-page ads claiming that investing for retirement is like playing the slot machines in Las Vegas. But the AARP Web site tells its senior members to invest their money in a 401(k) or an IRA, and also says that seniors do not invest enough in retirement plans. Why are these retirement plans safe and advisable but personal retirement accounts through Social Security are too risky? In addition, the AARP has its own investment plan through Scudder Investments that invests in mutual funds and stock index funds. If the AARP exists to look out for the interests of retired persons and they advise their membership to invest their money in mutual funds and stock index funds, my colleagues, it seems suspect that they would not support a program that would allow some, some flexibility through the Social Security program.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, recently I had the opportunity to visit Langley Air Force Base in Virginia and spend time with the commander of the Air Combat Command, Lieutenant General William Fraser, and many dedicated, indeed dedicated, members of the United States Air Force. As part of the Air Force Caucus trip, we had almost 50 people participating in the trip. Much of this trip focused on the F/A-22 Raptor and its importance to the future of the United States Air Force. After visiting with General Fraser and seeing the Raptor up close, I am more convinced and I think the participants who went on this trip are also convinced that the F/A- 22 will become an integral part of future military successes. Mr. Speaker, during my visit I was briefed not only about the warfighting capabilities of this plane but about the maintenance program as well. The Air Force uses cutting-edge technology to maintain this plane; and this, of course, leads to more efficient maintenance. It is the first jet to use an entirely paperless maintenance program, allowing new parts to be ordered or changes to be made significantly faster. The engine also utilizes new technologies. Its design allows it to be worked on while still on the plane, that is, the engine. In the past, engines often needed to be removed in order to be maintained. This is not the case for the F/A-22. These new technologies mean less time in the shop and, of course, more time in the air. Also, the maintenance training program has been improved. No longer are there these big, bulky maintenance manuals. The training is digital in real-time, with real-world conditions. It leads to more effective and efficient training. Maintainers spend less time in training and more time actually working on the plane. This, of course, leads to faster maintenance and thus the F/A-22s are not grounded for longer than is necessary. In the past, and particularly in the post-September 11 environment, homeland security has been our top priority here in Congress and our Nation. The F/A-22 plays a large role in protecting the homeland. According to the Air Force, 238 legacy fighters would be required and needed to protect this homeland while only 150 F/A-22s would be needed. The Bush administration unfortunately has proposed cutting $10 billion from the F/A-22 program over the next 5 years, leaving enough to buy 183 of the 381 planes the Air Force says it needs. Simply put, in my judgment, this number is just not sufficient. The Air Force will not be able to guarantee air superiority without a sufficient quantity of F/A-22s. The U.S. has not lost a soldier due to an air attack since 1952. The Air Force has made air superiority look so easy that we have begun to take it for granted, but maintaining this air dominance is not easy. For now, the United States Air Force is the best trained, the best equipped in the world; but Russia, China, India have made huge strides in achieving parity, and, in some cases, have even surpassed U.S. capabilities. Our current, but badly aging, fighters no longer enjoy technological or aerodynamic superiority when compared to the modern aircraft of potential adversaries. There have been some recent exercises pitting the F-15s, which the F/A-22 Raptor will replace, against one of Russia's primary export fighters, resulting in kill ratios favoring the SU-30. In contrast, on a recent training mission where a single F/A-22 went against five F-15s, the Raptor killed all the F-15s within 3 minutes. Additionally, due to a lack of stealth assets, the ability of our aircraft to operate in environments where hostile threats exist is inadequate. The only way to address these shortcomings, which will only worsen, I tell my colleagues, is with sufficient numbers of the F/A-22 Raptor. We cannot fight tomorrow's war with yesterday's equipment. That is why America needs the Raptor. With a variety of internal weapons, the Raptor can destroy or negate the most capable future threats: advance fighters; surface-to-air missile systems; and high- value, mobile ground targets. The F/A-22's combination of speed, stealth, and integrated avionics bring unmatched capabilities to cope with the 21st-century threat environment. Air dominance gives the joint force freedom from attack, freedom to maneuver and, of course, freedom to succeed. No substitute exists for the F/A-22's unique capabilities. With the international proliferation of sophisticated aircraft and air defense systems, U.S. fighters are losing their ability to leverage access for U.S. forces in hostile regions. The F/A-22 changes this equation with its revolutionary design and potent array of systems. Mr. Speaker, that is why we need to fully fund the F/A-22 Raptor over the next 5 years.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on the importance and effectiveness of defibrillators. Heart disease kills more than 250,000 Americans each year and many of these deaths result from sudden cardiac arrest, SCA. The most effective treatment for SCA is immediate defibrillation, in which thousands of lives are saved. Recognizing this years ago, I had the honor of working with the American Heart Association, AHA, in developing legislation addressing SCA. This cooperation led to the Cardiac Arrest Survival Act. Now, I am pleased to see that the AHA is donating, to Alachua County, Florida, defibrillators to be placed in each public school in Alachua County. The move comes in light of two incidents earlier this school year, in which area high school students collapsed. In Florida, nearly 12,800 people suffer a cardiac arrest each year, and 95 percent of them die. AHA's goal is to increase the survival rate from 5 to 20 percent and I support and stand behind them in reaching this end.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, this morning I wish to brag on my talented young constituents, the cover girls and boys that were featured in Roll Call this week. The band and color guard of the Keystone Heights Marching Indian, Florida, high school band visited Washington, D.C., this weekend. While here with Band Director Jason Dobson, they performed at the Jefferson Memorial and Capitol Hill. They played ``El Capitan,'' a John Philip Sousa march; ``Pevensey Castle'' by Robert Sheldon; ``Tis the Gift to Be Simple,'' an 18th century Shaker folk tune; and saving, of course, the best for last, student conductor Ashley Poplin conducted them in ``The Washington Post,'' another Sousa march. French horn player Karlo Martin, still fresh after three sleepless nights, described the trip as ``really enjoyable.'' I am proud of the students in Florida's Sixth Congressional District for their hard work and their skill. Being in a marching band is strenuous enough, but central Florida with all its heat adds an extra impediment to the challenge. Job well done.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, here we go again. As I said, this is the third time, and it should be a charm. We have passed this comprehensive legislation before; and I know I speak for a lot of my colleagues, probably on both sides of the aisle, that we should finally move forward after the large increases in gasoline. This is a timely piece of legislation. The Department of Energy predicts by the year 2025, U.S. oil and natural gas demand will rise by 46 percent with energy demand increasing 1 percent for every 2 percent in GDP growth. This increase in demand at home, coupled with the explosion of demand worldwide, has led to the increase in the cost of crude oil. To combat this, and the resulting record gas prices, the American people today are looking for Congress to act and we are doing it. This legislation contains a number of provisions that would lower gas prices. H.R. 6 encourages more domestic production of oil, promotes a greater refining capacity, and increases the gasoline supply by stopping the proliferation of expensive regional boutique fuels. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6 and finally enact solid, comprehensive energy legislation for the American people. Mr. Chairman, here we go again. As they say, the third time's the charm. This is the third Congress in a row we have tried to pass comprehensive energy legislation. I know I speak for many of my colleagues in saying I hope we can finally move forward and enact this very important and increasingly timely legislation. As we all know too well, energy is the lifeblood of the economy. The availability of energy at reasonable prices is key to economic growth and stability. Comprehensive national energy policy must ensure affordable, reliable energy and also promote national security. H.R. 6 does that and I urge all my colleagues to support it. The Department of Energy predicts that by the year 2025, U.S. oil and natural gas demand will rise by 46 percent, with energy demand increasing 1 percent for every 2 percent growth in GDP. This increased demand at home, coupled with an explosion of demand worldwide, has lead to an increase in the cost of crude oil. To combat this and the resulting record gas prices, the American people are looking to Congress to act. This legislation contains a number of provisions that would lower gas prices. H.R. 6 encourages more domestic production of oil, promotes a greater refining capacity, and increases the gasoline supply by stopping the proliferation of expensive regional boutique fuels. Ending our dependence on foreign oil is not only important to the economy but also doubly important to national security. Currently, the U.S. imports about 60 percent of its oil. The Department of Energy projects this number will increase to 73 percent by the year 2025. In order to ensure reliable and secure supplies of oil, we have no choice but to increase the domestic supply. Another way H.R. 6 increases domestic production of oil is by opening ANWR to oil and gas exploration. USGS estimates that there is between 5.7 and 16.0 billion barrels of oil that is technically recoverable. This estimate does not take into account that with new technology, the share will become higher. A resource of this magnitude cannot simply be ignored. H.R. 6 goes a long way to end our reliance on foreign oil. I once again urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6 and finally enact solid, comprehensive energy legislation for the American people.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, as the summer driving season is set to begin, gasoline prices are at a record high. While some continue to blame the Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress, the truth is that neither is responsible for the record highs. The reason for the high gas prices includes the cost of crude oil due to a worldwide explosion in demand, the lack of refinery processing capacity, and the overregulation here in Washington. The House will get the opportunity to address this problem this week with the House bringing to the floor the Energy Policy Act of 2005, H.R. 6. The long-awaited legislation contains a number of provisions that would lower gas prices. H.R. 6 encourages more domestic production of oil with incentives such as a streamlined permit process, promotes a greater refining capacity to bring more oil to market, and increases the gasoline supply by stopping the proliferation of expensive regional boutique fuels. The Department of Energy predicts by 2025 U.S. oil and natural gas demand will rise by 46 percent, with energy demand increasing 1 percent for every 2 percent in GDP growth. Critics of H.R. 6 claim that it would do little to curb consumption or drive down prices. In fact, this legislation includes provisions to do just that. In order to scale back demand for oil, the proposal encourages vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cells and increases funding for the Department of Transportation to work to improve fuel efficiency standards. Furthermore, it authorizes $200 million for the clean cities program which will provide grants to State and local governments to acquire alternative-fueled vehicles. Curbing demand is necessary, but it is not nearly enough to lower the price of gas. We also need to increase domestic production of oil. Ending our dependence on foreign oil is not only important to the economy but also doubly important to national security. Currently, the U.S. imports about 60 percent of its oil. The Department of Energy projects this number will increase to 73 percent by 2025. In order to ensure reliable and secure supplies of oil, we have no choice but simply to increase our domestic supply. Domestic energy production must be increased without compromising a clean environment. There have been giant leaps in technology that would produce oil and natural gas in an environmentally safe manner. We need a comprehensive energy policy that recognizes that sophisticated new technology greatly reduces adverse impacts on the environment by exploration and production. Along with the incredible advances in technology, transportation, and medicine that improve our lives comes the increased need for energy. In addition, overregulation by the government also contributes to regional and seasonal price fluctuations that increase costs and, of course, reduce flexibility to meet consumer demand. According to the Energy Information Agency, last year refining costs represented about 20 percent of the retail cost of gasoline. By simply scaling back the excessive and cumbersome Federal regulations on refiners, we could significantly reduce these costs. For example, the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments mandate the sale of cleaner burning reformulated gasoline in order to reduce summer smog in nine major metropolitan areas. The law also requires that RFG contain at least 2 percent oxygen by weight. To comply with these regulations, refiners must switch from winter grade fuel to costlier summer blend gasoline. According to the Federal Trade Commission, this adds 4 cents to 8 cents per gallon to the price of gasoline. Likewise, complying with a national low sulfur gasoline regulation for passenger cars not only represents scientific challenges for refiners but also could adversely affect gasoline supply and, of course, availability. The industry will need to invest more than $8 billion over the next 3 years to meet this requirement, which will result in higher prices at the pump. This hodgepodge of customized fuel requirements increases production costs which are ultimately reflected in the price of gasoline that we pay today. These varied gasoline specifications also restrict the ability of refiners and distributors to move supplies around the country in response to local and, of course, regional shortages. High gas prices affect every sector of the American economy and especially hit families the hardest. Congress has been debating and debating this issue for too long. We now have the chance to enact this week comprehensive energy legislation that will go a long way to lower the cost of gasoline. We need to fully embrace this opportunity before it is too late.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Madam Speaker, it has been 2 years since the United States troops entered Iraq, and it has become clear that the democratic elections that have been provided to the people of Iraq through this campaign have begun to spread throughout the region. In Beirut on Monday, hundreds of thousands of Lebanese protesters gathered in Martyr Square, which some are now calling Freedom Square, to demonstrate for the removal of Syrian troops to withdraw from Lebanon. They chanted, ``Sovereignty, Freedom, and Independence.'' When their prime minister was assassinated 4 weeks ago and replaced with a pro-Syrian prime minister, the Lebanese people took to the streets and called for freedom. Their protests sparked the resignation of the pro-Syrian prime minister. Because of U.S. efforts in the Middle East, freedom is no longer something inconceivable to the people of this region. Instead, they have witnessed the spread of freedom to their neighbors and have been empowered by it. We must continue to support policies which promote freedom in the Middle East.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to tell my colleagues and the country about a problem that has plagued our country for some 30 years, but continues unabated today. It is a problem that travels our highways and threatens our interstate commerce. It is a problem that affects our entire country and demands a Federal response. The problem is the crime of cargo theft. Every year, tens of billions of dollars are lost due to cargo theft, by one estimate, up to $60 billion a year in losses. But there are indirect costs as well. This huge amount of business and profit translates into the loss of at least 300,000 mid-level manufacturing jobs. Prices are increasing due to higher insurance premiums. People are losing their jobs and consumers are paying higher prices because of cargo theft. Making matters worse, law enforcement officials estimate 60 percent of cargo theft incidents go unreported, so these costs could be even greater. Typical targets for cargo theft often include shipments of clothing, prescription drugs, computers, and jewelry. A truckload of computer microprocessors can be worth millions of dollars. A truckload of cigarettes, just another common target, can be worth up to $2 million. Cargo thieves employ creative and highly efficient means to prey on cargo carriers and have managed to stay one step ahead of our authorities. Thieves know what they want, where they can find it, and how they can get it. And let us not forget that cargo theft is a national security issue. We know that terrorists can make a lot of money stealing and selling cargo, not to mention the fact that terrorists have a proven record of using trucks to either smuggle weapons of mass destruction or as an instrument of delivery. Make no mistake about it, cargo theft is a big business, and business is booming. But despite the incredible costs and high stakes involved, we still have not been able to come up with an effective way to fight cargo theft. The trouble is, cargo theft is not well-known or a high-profile issue. And one of the reasons that cargo theft does not receive the attention it deserves is because very little information exists concerning the problem. For example, there currently is no all- inclusive database that collects, contains, or processes distinct information and data regarding cargo theft. In order to combat the growing problem of cargo theft, I have introduced legislation, the Cargo Theft Prevention Act, which proposes commonsense solutions to this widespread crime. My legislation would require the creation of just such a database, providing a valuable source of information that would allow State and local law enforcement officials to coordinate reports of cargo theft. This information could then be used to help fight this theft in everyday law enforcement and estimating, and very importantly, estimating the exact cost of this crime. My act, the Cargo Theft Prevention Act, proposes that cargo theft reports be reflected as a separate category in the Uniform Crime Reporting System, or the UCR, the data collection system that is used by the FBI today. Currently, no such category exists in the UCR, resulting in ambiguous data and the inability to track and monitor trends. The last thing my bill does is have the United States Sentencing Commission take a look at whether criminals who commit cargo theft deserve stiffer penalties. This needs to be done because the high value-to-volume ratio of hi-tech and high-profit goods cargo theft has encouraged criminals previously involved in drug dealing to move into this area of activity, where they run less risk of detection and suffer less penalties if they are caught. As it now stands, Mr. Speaker, punishment for cargo theft is a relative slap on the wrist. Throw in the fact that cargo thieves are tough to catch, and what we have here is a low-risk, high-reward crime that easily entices potential criminals. We need to determine what sentencing enhancements and increases must be made, if at all. Members in this Chamber need to be made aware of this problem, a problem not only specific to the large port cities of this country, but a problem specific to all of our congressional districts. Billions of dollars are being sapped from our economy and this body is doing little to stop it. It is time that we get aggressive and make our highways again safe for commerce. The Cargo Theft Prevention Act proposes to finally give law enforcement officials and lawmakers the commonsense tools they need to combat the costly and growing crime of cargo theft. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, our Western Civilization reflects the contributions of many peoples, cultures, and nations. One vital source that gave much toward the depth and richness of our culture is ancient Greece. One of the great legacies of the city-states of Greece is the practice of self determination or democracy, the rule of the people. Many of the functions of our government are drawn from the Greek political system. Similarly, Greece greatly influenced the development of one of our major religions demonstrated through the word christos, or Jesus Christ. The Letters to the Corinthians and Thessalonians are essential parts of the New Testament. In countless high schools and colleges throughout the nation, students study the Iliad, a poem originating nearly 3,000 years ago. Modern philosophy still revolves around the thoughts and discussions of Plato and Aristotle. Also, early Greeks developed many of the mathematical disciplines that make our world add up. And, just this past summer the world met in the glory of athletic competition, the modern Olympics, another gift of the Greeks. I cannot imagine what our society would look like without the rich contributions of the Hellenistic age--architecture, literature, science, and art--but I am sure that it would be more drab and impoverished. In fact, the early roots of Western Civilization trace back to Greece, from where it grew out across the European continent and later across the Atlantic Ocean to the Western Hemisphere. Unfortunately, modern shortcuts such as the English language and 21st century culture are undermining the Greek language and traditions. As the incubators of so many wonders, the Greek language and the Greek culture deserve to be preserved and celebrated. This is essential for the benefit of the current generation and the enrichment of future generations. I have had the honor of meeting an individual dedicated to preserving the Hellenic spirit, Captain Panayotis Tsakos. He undertook this mission of love by creating the Maria Tsakos Foundation, which is devoted to honoring the various aspects of ancient, modern, and contemporary Greek culture. The Foundation provides multifaceted activities that teach the Greek language, dances, and literature. So far, more than 3,000 students have learned the language and culture. In addition, the Foundation provides scholarships for study in Greece and supports charities that uphold Greek traditions. I appreciate this opportunity to share this information with my colleagues, and to commend Captain Tsakos for his dedication to preserving the richness of the Hellenic world.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I was absent on official business and missed rollcall 90. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to congratulate one of the Nation's top public universities, the University of Florida, and their men's basketball team on their first- ever SEC title. This was a Gators 40th try for the SEC title against a team that has defined success in this event, the Kentucky Wildcats. The Gators beat the No. 4 Wildcats 70 to 53 on Sunday, March 13 in Atlanta, Georgia's Georgia Dome in front of 25,000 fans. This win marked the second time in 8 days that Florida had beaten Kentucky, which increased their winning streak to seven in a row. This winning streak comes at a very hot time, as the Florida Gators are heading into this year's NCAA tournament. The Gators are playing their first tourney game this Friday in Nashville, Tennessee, against Ohio. I wish them the best of luck in the NCAA tournament and congratulate them for their first-ever SEC title. Go Gators.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I represent the western part of Jacksonville and flew down for the funeral for Tillie Fowler and was quite moved. We lost a great leader. For Florida, she was a strong advocate, and we will miss Tillie quite a bit. For 8 years, I had the privilege and honor of working with her in Congress on behalf of the people of Jacksonville. I feel a great deal of sympathy and extend prayers for her husband, Buck, and her two daughters, Tillie Ann and Elizabeth. Tillie and I worked on the Cecil Field Navy Master Jet Base when it showed up on the base closure. Many a night we were working together shoulder to shoulder trying to figure out how we could prevent the Navy from closing this important Navy jet base. Unfortunately, we did not succeed, but I learned a lot from her. She combined humility with ambition. She had dedication, but she had grace. She was a woman of many talents. What the remarkable thing about Tillie was, you would talk to her and say, Tillie, I do not want to do that. She could get other people to do what they did not want to do, and in the end, they liked doing it somehow because of her leadership. It is a remarkable trait. She had a profound impact on all of the people she worked with, and she touched all of us. Jacksonville used to be a small town. It is a much larger town, and that is largely attributable, I think, to Tillie Fowler's activities. It has 1 million people. The city is recognized as a growing urban center. It hosted the Super Bowl recently, a feat very few cities have had the opportunity to claim. Jacksonville maintains a strong commitment to armed services, and has two major Naval facilities there. The successful transformation of Jacksonville over the past two decades owes much to Tillie Fowler. She worked on behalf of the area as a volunteer and as an elected official at the local and Federal level. This dedication to public service is really a family trait. While making a run for Congress in 1992, she offered to limit herself to four terms. All of us went up to her after she was in the midst of trying to decide to tell her, I think your constituents would be very happy if you continue serving, but she was quite principled, and she said she was going to leave Congress and honor her four terms. In fact, I believe the leadership asked her to stay. She accomplished many of the goals she set out to achieve. Mr. Speaker, we have lost more than an experienced lawmaker, public servant; we lost a good friend. She was a good friend to the people of Florida and to all of the men and women of our armed services. God bless Tillie Fowler. Mr. Speaker, last week our nation lost a great leader and Florida lost a strong advocate with the death of Tillie Fowler. For eight years, I had the privilege and honor of working with her in Congress on behalf of the people of Jacksonville. I miss my former colleague and my friend, and my prayers are with her husband Buck and their two daughters, Tillie Ann and Elizabeth. We worked together on the Brae commission when they had Cecil Field Navy master jet base on the closure list. We worked many nights together. She combined humility with ambition, and dedication with grace. As a women of many talents, she could get other people to do what they didn't want to do and to like it. She had a profound impact on all of the lives she touched throughout her life. Not so long ago, Jacksonville was looked upon as a small city supporting paper mills, a commercial port, and military bases. Today, the Jacksonville area numbers one million people and the city is recognized as a vibrant, growing urban center. Most recently it hosted the Super Bowl, a feat only a few cities can claim. Although it has shed some of its past, Jacksonville maintains its strong commitment to our armed services as the host to major military facilities. The successful transformation of Jacksonville over the past two decades owes much to Tillie Fowler. She worked on behalf of the area as a volunteer, and as an elected official at the local and federal levels. This dedication to public service is a family trait. Tillie's father, Culver Kidd, served for 42 years in the Georgia legislature, and her mother, Katherine Kidd, was a community leader. Tillie learned about civic and local involvement in Milledgeville, Georgia. I should point out that Milledgeville has contributed a great deal to this nation. It was also the home of the distinguished writer Flannery O'Connor and the long-time Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Carl Vinson. From her small hometown, Tillie pursued her education at Emory University in Atlanta earning a B.A. in political science and later a J.D. Armed with her law degree, Tillie came here to Washington, D.C., and worked on the staff of Congressman Robert Stephens of Georgia. Her strong talents were soon recognized and she was brought to the White House as a counsel in the Nixon Administration. During this period, Tillie not only expanded her professional horizons, she met and married a fellow attorney, L. Buck Fowler. In 1971, she moved with her husband to Jacksonville, Florida, where she set about the important job of raising a family. Although she put her career on hold, Tillie did not ease up on public service. She volunteered her efforts as the President of the Junior League of Jacksonville, with the American Red Cross, and other charitable groups. In 1985, she returned to the political scene with her election to the City Council and served on the council from 1985 through 1992. In 1989, she became President of the Jacksonville City Council, the first Republican and the first woman to hold that position. Although she retired from the council in 1992, her political career was just changing direction; she then successfully ran for Congress. Congresswoman Fowler returned to Washington with an ambitious agenda. She vowed to make Mayport Naval Station a top priority, and she succeeded. Through her position on the Armed Services Committee, she built a reputation as an advocate of a strong national defense. She improved the nation's commitment to military personnel and facilities in her district, throughout the nation, and around the world. Although a woman with a petite figure, she cast a giant shadow in support of our armed services: generals and admirals always knew her by her first name. While making her first run for Congress in 1992, Mrs. Fowler offered to limit herself to four terms. Although she was asked by her leadership and her colleagues to reconsider, Tillie is stepping down after four terms. After all, she had accomplished the goals she set out to achieve. We have lost more than an experienced lawmaker and public servant; we have lost a good friend. In fact, Mrs. Fowler was a good friend to the people of Florida, and perhaps more importantly, to the men and women of our armed services.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, last week a few of us had the opportunity to attend the opening arguments at the United States Supreme Court for two cases about the public display of the Ten Commandments. These cases are very interesting because not only are they specifically about the Ten Commandments, but in a larger sense, they are about the long-running dispute over the so-called separation of church and state. I say so-called, because there is not one word in the Constitution that mentions this alleged separation of church and state. And for over 150 years, the Supreme Court barely referenced this infamous phrase at all. The establishment clause of the first amendment provides that ``Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.'' For over 150 years, this was commonly understood to mean that the Federal Government cannot establish a national religion as the English did with the Anglican Church. But ever since cases like Everson in 1947; Engel, 1961; Lemon, 1971; and Wiseman in 1992, a handful of judges have interpreted the first amendment's establishment clause, misinterpreted, I might add in my view, to exclude more and more expressions of religion from the public square. Now we are at the point where children are not allowed to pray in public schools. The mildest nonsectarian invocations are forbidden at public events, the Boy Scouts are ostracized for mentioning God in their oath, and even the words ``under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance are under fire. Perhaps these Ten Commandments cases will be the turning point in the legal war against religion. We need to have a commonsense approach towards the relationship between religion and the State. That is why I was particularly interested to hear Justice Scalia's take on this case. He was his usual straightforward and honest self in his questions. He asked the ACLU lawyer, ``If a legislature can open its session with the public present with a prayer, why can it not, in the same building, post the Ten Commandments?'' He also called the Ten Commandments ``a symbol of the fact that Government derives its authority from God, which seems to me an appropriate symbol to put on Government grounds.'' Justice Scalia also logically noted that those who oppose the Ten Commandments on public grounds would ``also think that Thanksgiving proclamations are also unconstitutional, which were recommended by the very first Congress, the same Congress that proposed the first amendments.'' Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that the American people care about deeply. In fact, according to a recent AP poll, 76 percent of Americans support these religious displays, which Justice Scalia alluded to when he said the Ten Commandments send ``a profoundly religious message, but it is a profoundly religious message believed in by a vast majority of the American people.'' The irony of the Supreme Court hearing on these cases last week and of the outright hostility that the Court has displayed against religion in recent years is that above the head of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is a concrete display of the Ten Commandments. And close to these commandments is a marble sculptured relief of Moses himself, the great lawgiver. And let us not forget that at the beginning of each session at the Court, the crier opens with the proclamation: ``God save the United States and this Honorable Court.'' I agree with Justice Scalia and with the vast majority of the American people. In fact, to quote former Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas: ``We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a supreme being.'' That is why I have introduced legislation to display the Ten Commandments in the Capitol. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that the Ten Commandments are a historical document that contains moral, ethical, and legal truisms that any person of any religion or even an atheist can recognize and appreciate. They present a concise set of values that represent the moral background of this Nation and our common view on right and wrong. I believe that they promote a commitment to decency, which is why I have them hanging in my office. We start off every day with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance. Over the Speaker's rostrum it is posted, ``In God we Trust.'' There are statues and representations of religious figures scattered throughout the Capitol and House buildings. Posting the Ten Commandments would fit right in and would merely serve to remind Members that we have the responsibility as lawmakers to be as fair and just as possible. Certainly a reminder of God's law would be appropriate as we consider the Nation's laws.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, the economy continues to grow as a direct result of the President's economic policies and those of the Republican Congress. Here are a few facts to illustrate this. In January, we saw 146,000 new jobs and witnessed the twentieth consecutive month of job gains in the United States. The national unemployment rate is down to 5.2 percent, the lowest since September 2001. Job creation was up in 48 of the 50 States last year, and unemployment was down in all regions of the country. Mr. Speaker, opposing tax increases and endorsing pro-growth policies has led to job creation. We are increasing consumer confidence and ensuring that the American working families no longer bear the burdens that impede economic growth. We will continue here in Congress the hard work so that this progress continues.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, as the United States fights the war against terrorism, some members af the Senate have put politics above the needs of our men and women in uniform by not acting on the nominations of a number of high level Air Force positions. The Air Force continues to play a central role in winning the war on terrorism. Yet, on December 8, 2004, the Senate returned four Presidential nominations to the Air Force without action. The nominations included two nominations for promotion to the rank of lieutenant general as commanders of Numbered Air Forces, one lieutenant general nomination to a key position in the USAF Headquarters Staff, and one nomination to the rank of general as Commander of the Air Combat Command, the largest Air Force combatant command. I call upon the Senate to immediately act on these nominees. I also ask for unanimous consent to include in the Record a letter from the Air Force Association to President Bush urging leadership of the Executive and Legislative branches to resolve these issues at once. Our fighting men and women deserve no less. Air Force Association, Arlington, VA, January 25, 2005. The President, The White House, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. President: We are a nation at war . . . a war against global terrorism. On December 8, 2004, the Senate returned four Presidential nominations to the United States Air Force without action. The nominations included two nominations for promotion to the rank of lieutenant general as commanders of Numbered Air Forces, one lieutenant general nomination to a key position in the USAF Headquarters Staff, and one nomination to the rank of general as Commander of the Air Combat Command, the largest Air Force combatant command. Today, the leadership of this four star command is temporarily being provided by a lieutenant general at a time when our Air Force is heavily engaged in the Global War on Terrorism. The acting commander is scheduled to take command of a key Numbered Air Force in the Pacific, but this move has also been delayed pending Senate confirmation of the original nominee. It is reported that the Senate Allied Services Committee has vowed to keep holding nominations of Air Force senior officers until the Pentagon cooperates more fully in regard to the recent issues surrounding the procurement of air refueling aircraft, which now average 43 years of service. These procurement activities resulted from the Air Force implementation of the refueling replacement acquisition strategy directed by the House Armed Services, House Appropriations, and Senate Appropriations Committees. Despite the fact that the Secretary of the Air Force and the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition have tendered their resignations in order to remove the accountability argument, we still find no action on the general officer nominations. In addition, the USAF is now being led by an Acting Secretary--and on an equally serious note, the Acting Secretary wears three other critically important hats: that of the Under Secretary of the Air Force, the OSD Space Acquisition Chief, and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office. He will soon add a fifth critical hat as he takes on the responsibilities of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition. This vacuum in senior civilian and uniformed leadership has a deleterious impact on our Air Force and the morale of those who serve, and it is adversely impacting the many fine leaders who are committed to serving their nation. Leaving key positions unfilled for lengthy periods can have a significant impact on the ability of the Air Force to execute its mission. Lack of consistent senior leadership and supervision, which led to criminal prosecution, was cited recently in the case of an acquiition official who served approximately 50% of her time without confirmed appointed leaders above her. Our Air Force faces not only the demands of today's Global War on Terrorism, but is now entering a critical period where the Military Services are engaged in the Quadrennial Defense Review, planning for the future force, and supporting the Base Realignment and Closure efforts in shaping our infrastructure. These activities will result in key decisions that will directly affect the efficiencies and effectiveness of our U.S. Military. The Air Force and its sister services must also address Presidential Budget Decision 753--a critical decision document which will have significant impact on our current and long term force structure and weapons systems effectiveness. These activities require full-time, focused leadership., It is imperative that we move forward on nominating and confirming the required civilian and uniformed leadership of our Air Force in this especially critical time. We respectfully urge the leadership of the Executive and Legislative Branches to come together to resolve these issues without delay. The leadership requirements of our Air Force must be addressed now so that it can meet its responsibilities in addressing today's critical challenges. Our nation and those who serve it deserve no less, and our future security requires it. Respectfully, Stephen P. Condon, Chairman of the Board.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, last month a U.N. committee approved a resolution calling on nations quickly to adopt and implement legislation ``to prohibit all forms of human cloning inasmuch as they are incompatible with human dignity and the protection of human life.'' Further, the declaration, introduced by Honduras, also called on countries to ``prevent the exploitation of women.'' Cloning requires harvesting eggs from women. This is significant. While not binding, I find this a hopeful statement about an emerging view towards respecting the sanctity of human life. In early January I introduced my legislation, which, besides prohibiting Federal funding of human cloning, also expresses the sense of Congress that foreign nations should establish total prohibition on human cloning as well. The U.N. resolution will soon advance to the high court, and our Congress should lend our confidence to them. Please join with me in cosponsoring my bill H.R. 222.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee for yielding me this time. I think it is appropriate that I speak after the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) spoke in opposing the bill, because I support the bill. There is going to be opposition from a few people. They are going to complain that this bill is arbitrary; that the fine on individuals, which is $500,000, is too much, too expensive. But I think the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) have reached the right balance on this bill, so let us talk a little bit about it. It is not arbitrary. There is a lot of flexibility involved. It is not unfair or excessive. We establish a separate standard for individuals above and beyond how we deal with licensees so that we can go that extra mile to protect their first amendment rights. We should note that the penalty is up to $500,000. That means that the FCC has the discretion to fine much lower if it needs to. We all know that Janet Jackson is a person who can afford these fines, but if a local small-time entertainer violates our decency laws, the FCC can take into consideration that fact and that these individuals cannot afford $500,000. So maybe they will issue something like $5,000 or $10,000 or $25,000, still stiff enough to punish them for violating our laws and maybe enough to dissuade them from doing it again. In fact, the FCC has the discretion to fine them $1 if they see fit. So there is a lot of flexibility. In order to be penalized under this legislation, the individual must have a willful and intentional profanity in order to be penalized. This means that individuals have to act deliberately and consciously knowing that their indecent comments will be broadcast. In other words, if an entertainer is unaware that they are on camera and that they are profane, they would not be held responsible for this. The FCC can also check the list of aggravating factors that were established and then in turn determine the fine accordingly. The FCC will have to look at whether the comments were scripted or unscripted or live or recorded. Mr. Speaker, this is a reasonably balanced bill that backs our decency standards, I think, with force. For too long, the penalties associated with our decency laws were considered just a cost of doing business. That is simply what they were. We will now have the potential to have individuals put their money where their mouth is. I urge my colleagues to support this language, support this bill and pass it.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to tell my colleagues about a piece of legislation that I have put in; it is called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. My cosponsor is Congressman Rick Boucher. Last year we introduced a very similar piece of legislation, and it passed, my colleagues, with overwhelming bipartisan support. Our bill has the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the National Association of Wholesalers, among other prominent groups. What this legislation does is stops baseless lawsuits against gun manufacturers or dealers, based upon the criminal or unlawful third- party misuse of firearms. Now, some may ask the question, why do we need such legislation? The reason that we need it is because the firearms industry is under attack. Over the last few years, trial lawyers have filed suits against federally licensed firearm manufacturers across this country in the hopes of bankrupting this industry. They have been filing frivolous lawsuits that are based on the dubious premise, Mr. Speaker, that gun manufacturers should be held liable for the actions of others who use their products in a criminal or unlawful manner. In other words, if someone gets a gun and then commits a crime with it, these litigious gun-control advocates believe that gunmakers should be held liable for the damages or injuries that are caused. Now, that is like holding a car company responsible if a driver gets drunk, gets reckless, and hits someone with a vehicle. A law abiding manufacturer has a constitutional right to engage in interstate commerce without the fear of these frivolous lawsuits. I do not care if it is a business that makes guns, cigarettes, cars, fast food or whatever it is, although firearms are the only product that I have listed here which specifically has constitutional protection under the second amendment. Over 30 cities and counties, in addition to various individuals, have sued the gun industry since 1998. I am pleased to note that many of these cases have been completely, completely dismissed in various city, State, and Federal courts. In fact, just a few days ago San Francisco, based in California, the appellate court there unanimously upheld a superior court decision dismissing lawsuits filed by Los Angeles, San Francisco, and 12 other California municipalities against members of the firearms industry. I welcome this decision. However, there are still several lawsuits pending which threaten to devastate the industry. In New York City, recently enacted legislation allows victims of crime to sue the dealers and gunmakers. We also must consider that just the mere threat of these suits, taking the first couple of legal steps to defend these suits can be enough on their own to force some of the smaller companies out of business. As one prominent person said of this tactic, we are going to make the gun industry die a death by a thousand cuts. So our legislation will end these coercive and undemocratic lawsuits. Now, I understand there are some of my colleagues that may be hesitant to support my bill since the media and gun control advocates have spent years and millions of dollars vilifying the firearms industry. No one wants to be seen granting the industry special treatment or helping them to get away with something, or so it is perceived. I have two responses to this. First, the firearms industry has been around and has been respected for generations. They provide a valuable service and a highly desirable product to millions of sportsmen and supporters of those second amendment rights. They provide our law enforcement agencies and our officers with the tools necessary to fight crime in our neighborhoods, and they enable our Armed Forces to protect our freedoms around the world. The industry employs thousands of hard-working Americans and these Americans support their families like everybody else. These employees and their businesses pay taxes. It is an indisputable fact that the firearms industry has contributed immensely to our society over the years in a very positive way. But this does not mean that if one of these manufacturers purposely or recklessly sold a bad product they should be given a free pass. No, we are not saying that. Our legislation is very narrowly tailored to allow suits against any bad actor to proceed. It includes carefully crafted exceptions to allow legitimate victims their day in court for cases involving defective firearms, breaches of contract, criminal behavior by a gunmaker or seller, or the negligent entrustment of a firearm to an irresponsible person. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I am honored once again to introduce this commonsense bill, and I urge all of my colleagues to join with me in co-sponsoring this piece of legislation.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in favor of the rule and in support of the underlying bill, the REAL ID Act. This is probably one of the most important bills that we will have to vote on in the 109th Congress. The bill obviously will strengthen our borders, improve the rule of law, and protect our national security. It builds upon the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. These are things they have talked about and had recommended, and it begins to respond to the pleas of the many families who lost loved ones on that terrible day. It implements much needed driver's license reform. Now, driver's licenses have become the primary ID in the United States. It enables individuals to go get other identity documents, to transfer funds to U.S. bank accounts, obtain access to Federal buildings and other vulnerable facilities, purchase a firearm, rent a car, board a plane, et cetera. So lax standards and loopholes in the current issue process allow terrorists to obtain driver's licenses, often multiple licenses from different States, and abuse the license for identification purposes. The REAL ID Act corrects this. Identification documents are the last opportunity to ensure that the people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists. The REAL ID Act would require applicants to provide proof that they are in this country legally. Currently, 11 States do not have such a requirement, meaning the majority of States have already recognized the need for tighter requirements and standards, but unnecessary and dangerous gaps still exist in this system. So that is why we need this. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the bill.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the city of Jacksonville, Florida, which is the host for the 39th Super Bowl championship this Sunday. I think a lot of people were dismayed and a little bit surprised to read about a sportswriter, Tony Kornheiser, when he denigrated Jacksonville last week in a Washington Post article. Let me give the Members some interesting history about Jacksonville. Because of its strategic Atlantic Ocean port location, Jacksonville has always been involved in conflicts, appropriate, Mr. Speaker, enough for a Super Bowl host. Wars with Spain, France, the Revolutionary War, the Seminole Indian Wars, and the Civil War all touched Jacksonville. Twenty-five World War I steamers were launched from Jacksonville ports. In 1942, German spies infiltrated but luckily were captured before blowing up Florida's essential railroad lines. And, finally, Mr. Speaker, during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, what was the busiest military port in this country? You guessed it. Jacksonville moved more supplies and personnel than any other American port. I am proud to represent part of this historical, important city and welcome Mr. Kornheiser and other guests to this Super Bowl weekend.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and offer my best wishes to a person who truly exemplified a true civil servant. After 38 years in government service, Barry Adams, a good friend and constituent of mine, retired on December 16, 2004. Straight out of high school, Barry began his career at the Naval Aviation depot in Jacksonville as an equipment cleaner helper. Barely a year later, he answered his Nation's call and served in the Army in both Korea and Panama. After his military service, Barry returned to the depot and over the years became a stalwart advocate for the depot's mission and its employees. Very few people worked as hard or represented their fellow civil servants as well as Barry Adams. I have had the honor of working with Barry over the years on issues affecting the employees of NAVAIR Depot in Jacksonville, Florida, with many of them living in my Congressional district. As President of the Jacksonville Naval Air Station Association, Barry ably represented his fellow employees before Congress and the Executive Branch, consistently fighting for better pay, additional workload for the depot, and better personnel policies. He fought hard to ensure that the Depot did not fall prey to the BRAC process. He understood the value of what the Depot and its employees had to offer our forces. No matter what subject matter was discussed, Barry made sure that the ultimate reason behind his advocacy was the Depot's mission to serve the warfighter. He made sure that Members of Congress understood that the employees at NAVAIR Depot were dedicated to serving the needs of the Fleet and other services and that each and every person was proud to be a part of that mission. NAVAIR Depot is losing a dedicated advocate, however, Barry's efforts have paid dividends and the employees and the Navy should be thankful for his service. I wish Barry the best in his retirement.

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall No. 7. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. STEARNS

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased on this first day of the 109th Congress to introduce several pieces of legislation that I have been pursuing over the years, and for which I will continue to advocate these next two years. First, I am excited to again introduce legislation to help all American savers. My legislation, the Simple Savings Tax Relief Act of 2005, simply eliminates the taxation of interest earned in savings accounts, such as passbook savings accounts or bank certificates of deposit. I think at least some of this interest should be tax-free, as we have been working towards for other forms of non-earned income. This legislation would end a punitive tax, especially assist low and middle- income earners, and ultimately contribute toward the goal of encouraging individual responsibility and taking charge of one's own financial destiny. Next, for years I have authored legislation to repeal the 2 percent excise tax on private foundations. The United States is blessed with a deep spirit of philanthropy, and charitable organizations serve the interest of both the individual and the community. Under current law, however, not-for-profit private foundations generally must pay to the IRS a 2 percent excise tax on their net investment income, which diverts from the purposes for which these foundations were founded. Optimistically, this body passed a reduction of this charitable impediment to 1 percent in the 108th (H.R. 7), but as it failed to become law, I am reintroducing this legislation and we shall try again. Next, I am pleased to again sponsor the Health Care Tax Deduction Act of 2005. This would allow deductions for amounts paid for health insurance premiums and unreimbursed prescription drugs. This would provide much-needed relief to individuals struggling with the high cost of health insurance and prescription drugs through a tax deduction, and tax parity with those of us who have employer-provided tax-deductible health insurance. Expansively, this benefit extends to all IRS-defined health insurance premiums such as an HMO, PPO, a traditional indemnity plan, a new HSA, and also long-term care premiums. Right now, under the current tax code, in order to claim health care expenses individuals must file an itemized tax return. My bill would simplify and extend this tax preference for all filers. I also am reintroducing the Allied Health Reinvestment Act of 2005, along with my friend Dr. Strickland from Ohio. This important legislation offers incentives via scholarships and loans to encourage students and faculty to enter the essential but undersupplied allied health professions, such as physical, occupational, and speech rehabilitation, and medical and radiological technologists to name a few. Also, with an eye towards the value of human life, I reintroduce my Human Cloning Research Prohibition Act, which restricts federal funding and encourages other nations to do so as well. Finally, I am pleased to reintroduce a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of establishing a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) awareness month. I do this again with my friend Mr. Lewis of Georgia. In past Congresses, this bill has had tremendous support from Members and from the U.S. COPD Coalition, which comprises the patient and provider community. The House passed this legislation in the summer of 2003, and we started a bicameral Caucus in the winter of 2004 to advance our efforts. COPD is an umbrella term used to describe the airflow obstruction associated mainly with emphysema and chronic bronchitis. This is a debilitating disease, that is currently the nation's fourth leading cause of death, and I am proud to bring awareness to COPD. I look forward to working with my colleagues on all these important pieces of business for the nation.