Bart Stupak

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor someone who has dedicated 30 years of service to this great institution. Those of us on the Democratic side of the aisle know how much we have come to rely on Tim Friedman who has spent the last 3 decades working in the House Democratic Cloakroom. One can imagine that after 30 years working on and around the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, Tim has just about seen it all. Throughout it all, Tim has always been on hand to assist Members of Congress with all requests, large and small. By working with us and making it easier for Members of the House to fulfill their official duties, Mr. Friedman has served the U.S. House of Representatives, the United States Congress and his country admirably. As he prepares to leave us, I wish him well and hope that his back improves for a better back swing so that he can enjoy many good days on the golf course. While all of us will miss seeing Tim day in and day out, we are truly happy for him and wish him all the best as he enjoys his well-deserved retirement.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, This debate on H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, is really one of the most fundamentally important debates that this body can undertake. H.R. 810 addresses the most basic, essential ethical issues--life, when does it begin, and when should life, including human embryos, be open to experimentation and scientific research. It is society's ethical obligation to draw boundaries around the possibilities of science. I believe we must draw a boundary that says ``no'' to embryonic stem cell research that requires the killing of embryos that if left to grow would become children. Children who would grow up to become police officers, factory workers, soldiers, government employees, lawyers, doctors, and scientists. I believe that embryos, as life, should be treated with as much respect as you and I, and I reject the view that embryos are mere medical waste, as some have suggested. Where do we draw the line as a Nation, and say, we will not cross that line? These proponents of H.R. 810 would not have us draw a line. This legislation leaves too many questions unanswered. When do embryos become human life? After 40 hours? After 2 days? H.R. 810 is silent on when embryos become human life--it doesn't specify how long these embryos are allowed to grow before they are killed--2 days, 5 days, 14 days, or more! Proponents of H.R. 810 will claim that their legislation will address the ``ethical manner'' in which this research will be conducted, yet their legislation is silent on the ethics, other than a subsection that directs the secretary to create guidelines in 60 days or less. As elected leaders, we should set basic guidelines, not leave the guidelines to an unelected and unnamed administration official. This legislation is unethical and unnecessary. Human embryonic stem cell research is completely legal today in the private sector and eligible for state funding in several states, including California and New Jersey. Since August 2001, over 128 stem cell lines have been created. Furthermore, human embryonic stem cell research is funded by the federal government today. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) spent an estimated $38 million on Embryonic Stem Cell research in Fiscal Year 2006. 22 human embryonic stem cell lines are currently receiving federal funds. These lines are sufficient for basic research according to NIH director, Dr. Zerhouni. Finally, embryonic stem cell research remains unproven. Not a single therapy has been developed from embryonic stem cell research. Instead of cures, embryonic stem cell research has led to tumors and deaths in animal studies. While the promise of embryonic stem cells is questionable, adult stem cells are being used today to save lives. Recognizing this, the National Institutes of Health spent $568 million in Fiscal Year 2006 on adult stem cell research. Adult stem cells are being used today in clinical trials and in clinical practice to treat 72 diseases including, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, juvenile diabetes, brain cancer, breast cancer, lymphoma, heart damage, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile arthritis, stroke, and sickle cell anemia. Let me be clear, I am committed to funding ethical scientific research that will unlock the origins of diseases and develop cures that can help my constituents. But we cannot let science leap-frog our ethics, our morals, and our legal system. This is not a partisan issue, and it's bigger than a right to life issue. I urge Members to vote against H.R. 810 and sustain the President's veto.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, as Congress prepares to leave for the August recess, American families are being forced to make significant sacrifices just to be able to afford to drive to work, let alone try to take their family vacation this summer. I find it appalling that this body has not properly addressed high gas prices. Over the Fourth of July, the national average price for a gallon of gas was approximately $3.00. Gas prices in my northern Michigan district exceeded $3.00, with many areas seeing a 20 to 25 percent increase in gas prices in 24 hours from July 2 to July 3, just in time for the July 4th holiday. For almost a year now, we Democrats have been calling on the Republican leadership to allow a real price gouging bill to be passed into law. One hundred thirty-five Members of this body have signed a discharge petition requesting that my legislation, the Federal Response to Energy Emergencies Act, the FREE Act, be brought to the floor for a vote. After continuing lobbying from Democrats, Republicans finally introduced their own legislation, which was called price gouging, and it was a price gouging bill in theme only. That bill was passed by this body in May, and it has been stalled in the other body, controlled by the Republicans. Unlike the Republican price gouging legislation, my bill, the FREE Act, would specifically set guidelines for the Federal Trade Commission to use to define price gouging, including provisions that would make it illegal to have unconscionable pricing, providing false price information, and market manipulation. The FREE Act also contains a provision that would promote price transparency, helping consumers to understand whether or not oil and gas prices are fair and reasonable. The FREE Act would also apply to natural gas and propane. Neither natural gas nor propane is addressed by the Republican bill. Despite efforts to sugar coat the Federal Trade Commission's report recently released, called Invasion of Gasoline Price Manipulation and Post-Katrina Gas Price Increases, the Federal Trade Commission did find price gouging. Twenty-three percent of the refineries, 9 percent of the wholesalers and 25 percent of the retailers charged significantly higher prices. In other words, they gouged the American people. And these prices were not attributable to either increased costs or national or international market trends. Mr. Speaker, the American people are fed up. They know price gouging when they see it and they are being gouged. The Federal Government has responsibility to protect consumers from price gouging. Price gouging legislation is long overdue. Congress needs to pass legislation to allow the Federal Trade Commission to prosecute price gouging. Just as we must continue to work to protect consumers from gouging and predatory pricing at the pump, we must also investigate the effect that energy futures trading can have on gas prices. Traditionally, trading of energy commodities such as crude oil, gasoline, diesel fuel and natural gas has taken place on the New York Mercantile Exchange, NYMEX, with oversight by the Commodities Future Trading Commission. However, an increasing amount of trading does not occur on NYMEX but in off-market deals known as over-the-counter trading. According to the bipartisan Senate Homeland Security Committee report on oil and gas market speculation released on July 27, it says: ``As an increasing number of U.S. energy trades occurs on unregulated over-the- counter electronic exchanges or through foreign exchanges, the trading reporting system becomes less and less accurate, the trading data becomes less and less useful, and its market oversight program becomes less comprehensive.'' It is estimated that up to 75 percent of all energy trades are now over-the-counter, where speculation occurs without any regulation or oversight by the Federal Government. Without effective oversight, there is no way to know whether energy speculators are basing their trades on market realities or instead taking advantage of the system to make money at the expense of hardworking Americans. Unregulated trades based on speculation, fueled by fear, result in greed, as we can see from the record profits of the oil companies. In fact, a recent Justice Department investigation had led to charges against traders for the energy conglomerate, British Petroleum. It is alleged that several traders attempted to corner the market on propane in a pipeline network that serves the Midwest and the Northeast in order to drive up the price for propane in these areas. Court documents show that they were at least temporary successful in driving up artificially the price of propane. Investigations into additional civil and criminal violations are ongoing. When speculators, motivated by greed, take advantage of markets to drive up energy prices, the Federal Government must intervene to prevent this manipulation from being passed on to the American consumer. Due to these concerns, I have introduce the Prevent Unfair Manipulation of Prices (PUMP) Act, H.R. 5248 to bring Over the Counter trading under the oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The PUMP Act would require off-market speculators to play by the same rules as on-market traders. This increased oversight will improve confidence in the market and help eliminate the unreasonable inflation of crude oil prices. The legislation would also increase penalties for speculators found to be unfairly manipulating the oil futures market. Some economists estimate that oversight over all futures trades would lower the price of a barrel of crude oil by as much as $20. Unfortunately, rather than proposing real solutions to bring down energy prices, Republicans have instead continued to propose bills to eliminate environmental standards, provide more tax breaks for bill oil, and promote the Republicans' favorite solution: drill, drill, drill. I find it appalling that anyone could suggest that big oil needs more breaks, given their exorbitant profits. And we can not drill our way towards solving our addiction to oil. Only by ensuring fair markets for American consumers and the promotion of alternative fuels can we truly reduce energy prices. Our constituents are looking to us, to Congress, for relief. It is our duty to approve legislation that would provide real solutions, to protect Americans from the increased financial hardship that price gouging and high gas prices artificially created during the summer tourism months.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, for 5 years now Washington Republicans have refused to fund border security programs. But it is not only our effort at our borders, Republicans refuse to go after employers who break the law. Under their leadership, work site enforcement was cut back by 95 percent. As a result, the government prosecuted four employers in 2003 as opposed to 182 in 1999. Securing our borders doesn't happen magically. It takes funding and it takes agents at the border, two things seriously lacking right now. Under pressure to act earlier this year, President Bush vowed to have 2,500 National Guard troops on our border by June 30, but all he could muster was 248. The administration claims the rest of the Guardsmen are now going through training. So much for keeping promises. Now the House Republicans are seriously jeopardizing any real attempts to sign a border security bill into law this year. House Republicans simply refuse to negotiate a final bill, choosing instead to hold hearings on a bill they already passed. The time for talking is over. It is time for House Republicans to join us to secure our borders.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize an outstanding individual who has dedicated the last nine years of her life to spurring economic growth and development in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. Ms. Linda Hirvonen retired at the end of June as Director of the Delta County Economic Development Alliance. During her time there, she worked tirelessly on economic and community development in northern Michigan. Ms. Hirnoven was critical to business and job growth in Delta County. As of April 2006, there were 2,400 more people in the workforce than when she began in 1997. Ms. Hirvonen assisted 575 individuals and companies looking to start a business or relocate in Delta County. Those statistics are impressive and speak to Ms. Hirvonen's record of success and accomplishment. However, they only tell part of the story. What she will perhaps be remembered for most is the leadership and vision in economic development that she brought to the job and to Delta County. Ms. Hirvonen is credited by many as coining the term ``coopetition,'' the concept that private businesses should cooperate with each other and with nonprofits to develop the community infrastructure that will facilitate economic growth and lay the foundation for a stable business environment. This concept of ``coopetition'' has guided Delta County's Economic Development Alliance and the many programs that Ms. Hirvonen developed during her tenure. Ms. Hirvonen was instrumental in the creation of the Upper Peninsula Economic Development Alliance and served as the Alliance's first president. She saw to the creation of the Bay Area Economic Club and served as the Club's permanent board secretary. She pioneered the creation of Delta Force, the community leadership development program. A newcomer herself to the area in 1997, Ms. Hirvonen established a program through the Alliance that provides a network of support for newcomers to Delta County. She recognized that for the community to grow, newcomers to the area need to feel welcome. The newcomers unit provided a valuable network for those individuals and businesses that are new to Delta County. Ms. Hirvonen also led the Alliance's efforts to better assess the needs of existing businesses in the Upper Peninsula. Thanks to her leadership, the Economic Development Alliance implemented the Upper Peninsula Business Barometer, a UP-wide survey of existing businesses to better understand business' needs and strengths. The overarching goal of the Economic Development Alliance has been to support and assist business creation, growth and expansion in Delta County. Ms. Hirvonen has been tremendously successful in advancing that goal, attracting several businesses to Delta County. She is particularly proud of one new business, Issues and Answers Network. This business came to Delta County in 2001 and, with the Alliance's help, opened two more locations throughout the Upper Peninsula. The company employs 150 people in Escanaba and, thanks to this expansion, Issues and Answers should employ more than 300 people throughout the Upper Peninsula by the end of this year. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Linda Hirvonen has made it her business to see to business expansion and growth in Delta County and in the Upper Peninsula. Bringing business and economic growth to smaller, rural communities is often challenging. It can only happen when people like Ms. Hirvonen dedicate themselves to the effort. Today, after nine years of distinguished service to her community, I congratulate Ms. Hirvonen on a job well done. Her husband, Dr. Michael Allkins, recently retired himself. The two of them will now have more time for their mutual pastimes of golf, long walks on sandy beaches and martinis at sunset. To both of them, I say: enjoy, you have earned it. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and the House of Representatives join me in congratulating my friend, my constituent, Ms. Linda Hirvonen and thanking her for her hard work and nine years of service to Delta County and Michigan's entire Upper Peninsula.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, as Congress gets ready for the Fourth of July recess, I am reminded again that we do not have a Federal price gouging law on the books. And just in time for the Fourth of July. In Marquette, Michigan, last night, gas prices were $2.89. When my constituents woke up this morning, it is now $3.09. Just in time for the Fourth of July. For almost a year now, we Democrats have been calling on the Republican leadership to allow a real gas price-gouging bill to be passed in the law. One hundred and thirty-five Members of this body have signed a discharge petition requesting that my legislation, the Federal Response to Energy Emergencies, the FREE Act, be brought to the floor for a vote. After continued lobbying from Democrats, Republicans finally introduced their own legislation, which was called ``price gouging,'' and it is price gouging in theme only, and that bill was passed by this body in May. Unlike the Republican price-gouging legislation, my legislation, the FREE Act, would specifically set guidelines for the Federal Trade Commission to use to define price gouging, including provisions that would make illegal unconscionable pricing, providing false information, and market manipulation. The FREE Act also contains a provision that would promote price transparency, helping the consumer to understand the information to know what gas and oil prices should be that would be fair and reasonable. The FREE Act would also apply to natural gas and propane. Neither natural gas nor propane is addressed in the Republican bill. Despite efforts to sugar-coat the Federal Trade Commission's recently released Investigation of Gasoline Price Manipulation and Post-Katrina Gasoline Price Increases, the FTA, the Federal Trade Commission, did find that, after Hurricane Katrina refiners, wholesalers, retailers charged significantly higher gas prices that were not attributable to either increased costs or international market trends. Mr. Speaker, the American people are fed up. They know price gouging when they see it, and they are being gouged like my constituents in Marquette, Michigan, just today. The Federal Government has a responsibility to protect consumers from price gouging. Price-gouging legislation is long overdue. Congress needs to pass legislation to allow the FTC to prosecute price gouging. Our constituents are looking to us, to Congress, for relief. It is our duty to approve legislation that would provide that relief, to protect Americans from increased financial hardship that price gouging and high gas prices create, especially during the summer tourism months. Whether you support the Pombo bill or not, I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we can consider the FREE Act, a real price-gouging bill that can provide relief for gas customers today.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, at the end of this week, the House Republican leadership will once again leave town for another recess without seriously addressing our Nation's energy crisis. House Republicans have trumpeted this week as Energy Week. You would think if they were really serious about tackling this crisis we would spend the entire week debating a comprehensive energy proposal that would end our reliance on foreign oil and foster new energy technologies. Instead, we get more of the same from the Republican leadership. Energy Week has turned into Energy Day, a debate on one bill that would allow oil and gas companies to drill on the Outer Continental Shelf off both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Drilling off our coasts is not only environmentally and economically risky, but it is not possible for another 7 years. How is that supposed to help consumers today? The answer is that it is not. House Republicans are only interested in lining the pocketbooks of the oil and gas companies. If House Republicans were serious about addressing our energy crisis, the House would debate my legislation that would reduce the price of a barrel of oil by $20. Instead, we spend 1 day on a bill that does nothing to assist Americans with the high cost of energy.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this bipartisan amendment. For years, the Bush administration has been talking tough on drugs and law enforcement while slashing the funding that makes law enforcement possible. The big drops in crime during the Clinton years were made possible by programs like Byrne that put dollars where they are needed: in the hands of local police departments and task forces. Since 2001, however, funding has been cut again and again, from over $1 billion to less than $367 million in this year's bill. These cuts go against everything we know to be true about drug policy. Ninety percent of drug arrests are made by State and local law enforcement, and local drug task forces are our first and best line of defense against the growing problem of meth in our communities. Now more than ever, we need to support the work that our local law enforcement officers are doing.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, 11 days ago in this House, we had a partial limited debate on the war in Iraq. The same day, it was reported in a number of the area newspapers that there was consideration of giving amnesty to those Iraqis that killed, maimed, or injured U.S. troops or citizens. A few of us took to the floor during the Iraq debate and raised the issue of amnesty. Is this what we are fighting for in Iraq, the type of democracy that gives people who kill American soldiers amnesty? Last week, I joined with Democratic leadership, Mr. Larson, Mr. Clyburn, Mr. Murtha, Mr. Skelton, Mr. Abercrombie, and others, and introduced House Joint Resolution 90, which says: Disapproving the grant of amnesty by the government of Iraq to persons known to have attacked, kidnapped, wounded, or killed members of the Armed Forces of the United States or citizens of the United States in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, proposing amnesty for Iraqis who have killed our troops is another stunning example of the failure of this administration's handling of the war and their overall policy. I, like the rest of the American people, would like to know, what did the President know about this amnesty and when did he know it? I find it coincidental that the day after the President comes back from his secret trip to Iraq, we start hearing these reports in newspapers about an agreement on amnesty. In 3 years of war, we have lost more than 2,500 of our best and brightest Americans. The war in Iraq now boils down to amnesty for insurgents who attack and kill U.S. troops? This amnesty proposal appears to have the tacit agreement of the Bush administration and the Iraqi government officials, as they were quoted in the Washington Post as saying, and I quote, ``There is some sort of understanding between us and the U.S.-led multi-national force in Iraq that there is a patriotic feeling among Iraqi youth and the belief that those attacks are legitimate acts of resistance and defending their homeland. These people will be pardoned definitely, I believe.'' So officials in the Iraqi government believe that this is a done deal, and that attacking U.S. troops is a courageous act of self- defense. We could not disagree with it more, and that is why we have our House Joint Resolution 90. I want to know, who agreed with the Iraqi government? How did they get this understanding that it is part of the policy of the United States that it is okay to kill U.S. troops? Was it someone in the Department of Defense, someone in the Secretary of State, or, again, during the meeting the President had in Iraq a few weeks ago, was that part of it? The amnesty was reported in the papers the same day that two U.S. troops were found to be tortured and mutilated in Iraq. Do we give their torturers, their killers amnesty? Is this what the Commander-in- Chief does, lead troops into war, and then it develops into a civil war and those who kill U.S. troops get amnesty? We ask the Republican leadership to bring House Joint Resolution 90 up before this floor. Let's bring it up before the Fourth of July recess, pass this House resolution, it should move quickly, and it should be a bipartisan resolution. There is a lot of talk in this town, and some people like to use the word cut and run. Let me ask this. If the administration and if this Congress accept a policy that says it is okay to kill U.S. troops, what sort of message are we sending to the Iraqis on the street that it is okay to kill U.S. troops? But, more importantly, what sort of message are we sending to the 130,000 troops that are over there fighting in Iraq? To me, a proposal giving amnesty to those who have murdered Americans is the real definition of cut and run. I urge the Republican leadership to allow our resolution to come to the floor, House Joint Resolution 90. No amnesty in Iraq, no amnesty for those who kill, maim, torture U.S. troops or our citizens in the country of Iraq.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I come before you tonight after listening to the presentations that have been taking place all day, not only as a Member of this body but as a parent who has lost a child. My son, B.J., who passed away a little more than 6 years ago, would have turned 24 tomorrow. Every time I learn about loss of life in Iraq, another son or daughter, mother or father, brother or sister, I can't help but think about my son B.J. and the profound pain and loss that will remain with us for the rest of our lives. That intense pain that we feel over the loss of B.J. is being felt every day by those families here in America who have suffered a loss in Iraq, and that is one of the reasons why I oppose this war and one of the reasons why I plan to oppose this resolution. But one of the other reasons I oppose this resolution deals with honesty and truth. Boake Carter is credited with saying that ``in time of war, the first casualty is truth.'' Mr. Carter's statement is applicable to the resolution before us today. Like the one-sided resolution presented to the House last December, the Republican majority has refused to allow a true debate on the war on Iraq. The truth is 2,500 servicemen and -women have died in Iraq. The truth is the so-called coalition countries, including Great Britain, are drawing down their troops in Iraq. The truth is the Republican majority in its resolution today wants to blur the truth, that the cause and purpose of the war in Iraq is the same as the war in Afghanistan. The truth is the Republican majority in its resolution today wants to blur the truth that the cause and purpose of the war in Iraq is justified by the terrorist attacks of September 11. The truth is the Republican majority in its resolution today wants to blur the truth saying that we who oppose this war in Iraq are not as patriotic as those who support the war. The truth is the Republican majority in its resolution today wants to blur the truth saying that those who do not support Resolution 861 do not support our troops in Iraq. Resolution 861 continues the open-ended commitment of U.S. troops in Iraq and embodies President Bush's latest attempt to justify the U.S. involvement in Iraq. Last December the President and his congressional allies claimed the Iraqi parliamentarian elections were a ``crucial victory'' in establishing a democracy in Iraq. Thus, through this election, ``victory'' was inevitable in Iraq. Even Vice President Cheney declared the insurgency was ``in their final throes.'' America has heard this type of reasoning before from President Johnson during the Vietnam War. In 1967, the South Vietnamese freely elected their government. President Johnson then declared the Vietnamese election had established a democracy supported by the Vietnamese people. Even our Vietnam military leaders declared the war would be over soon as there was ``light at the end of the tunnel.'' After this Vietnamese election, and the light at the end of the tunnel, 3,800 more Americans would die in Southeast Asia. Since May 1, 2003, when the President declared ``mission accomplished'' in Iraq, over 2,300 troops have died in Iraq. What is the victory that the President and his congressional supporters envision in Iraq for the U.S.? What is the strategy for the Iraqi war mission to be accomplished? This is not a war like our grandparents fought. This is an insurgency. There is no country to hoist a white flag of surrender. There is no recognized political entity that America can sign a peace agreement with. There is only an insurgency of fanatics who have no desire to reach peace with the United States. Our brave men and women in the military are trying to build a democracy in a country that views U.S. troops as occupiers. Almost one- half of the Iraqi people believe it is justifiable to kill our U.S. troops. The U.S. military has been used to prop up a government being threatened by a guerrilla insurgency. With this Iraqi insurgency, I cannot envision an event, a goal or a date when victory in Iraq can indisputably be achieved. What has President Bush said about achieving victory in Iraq? The President said the United States will stay the course and the next President will have to withdraw our troops from Iraq. It will be 2\1/2\ years, or 30 months, before this President leaves office. Does this mean America will spend another $300 billion on the war in Iraq? Does it mean America will suffer 18,000 more young people to war wounds and another 2,500 killed? In October 2002, I warned that this administration would open a Pandora's box if the United States unilaterally went to war in Iraq. Mr. President, you opened Pandora's box with all its death and destruction of American and Iraqi lives. You cannot simply wash your hands of this war and leave it to the next President to withdraw our troops from Iraq. It is time for America to demand accountability from the President and the Iraqi Government. It is time for an Iraqi accountability plan to bring this war to an end. Because of America's sacrifice, the people of Iraq have been able to participate in a democracy by electing the leaders who will shape their young government and institute laws to protect them. This is a giant step towards accountability. The formation of a new government in Iraq is more than just filling out a cabinet. It is an opportunity for the people of Iraq to accept responsibility for governing their country. This responsibility extends beyond voting or forming a new government or killing Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Now, is the time for Iraqis to be accountable for themselves and their developing country. I believe that in order for the principles of democracy to take hold in Iraq, the target of the insurgency, our U.S. troops, must be removed as soon as possible! The President must develop a strategy to bring our troops home. I believe America should demand from the Bush administration an Iraq Accountability Plan that will set clear and measurable goals. The United States has provided the Iraqis with an opportunity for freedom, democracy and self-governance. But it is the responsibility of the Iraqi people to seize the opportunity and set forth these principles in their land. In this war; the truth lies in today's The Washington Post headline which states ``Iraq Amnesty Plan May Cover Attacks on U.S. Military.'' The war in Iraq has boiled down to amnesty for insurgents who attack and kill U.S. soldiers but no amnesty for the insurgents who kill Iraqi citizens. This amnesty proposal appears to have the tacit agreement of the Bush Administration for Iraqi government Officials stated, ``There's some sort of understanding between us and the UNF-I [The U.S.-led Multi-National Force-Iraq] that there is a patriotic feeling among the Iraqi youth and the belief that those attacks [on U.S. military personnel] are legitimate acts of resistance and defending their homeland. These people will be pardoned definitely, I believe.'' If you vote ``yes'' on this Resolution, you are supporting the Iraqi Government's belief that it is ``ok'' to give Iraqi's amnesty for attacking and killing U.S. troops! I cannot, and I will not support Resolution 861 which supports a government that pardons and justifies killing of 2,500 American personnel as Iraqi patriotism! I will not support a resolution that leaves our commitment in Iraqi ``open-ended''; or which allows this President to hand over the Iraq war to the next President, 30 months from now; nor a resolution that does not have a strategy to end the war in Iraq. I urge my colleagues to reject this resolution!

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed out of order and address the House for 5 minutes.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor 12 extraordinary young women and their coaches who showed incredible determination, character and athleticism in winning the 2005 Girls Class-C State of Michigan Basketball Championship. As the 2005 season commenced, the Houghton Gremlins were considered by many observers to be in a rebuilding phase. However, this dedicated team of young women was determined to shed that label, disprove the skeptics and move beyond the regional level. The young women of the 2005 Houghton Gremlins were not the tallest team. In fact, not a single one of their players stood above 5 feet and 8 inches. Many of the teams the Gremlins faced had players who were taller than 6 feet. Yet, what the Gremlins lacked in height, they made up for in speed, skill and, most importantly, a tireless desire to succeed. In many ways, they embodied the famous Theodore Roosevelt quote, ``What matters is not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.'' The Gremlin's regular season record of 18-2 demonstrated their winning attitude. Their undefeated record within the West PAC Conference was yet further evidence of their hard work. However, as the post season began, the Gremlins felt that even with a great regular season, they had not yet accomplished their goal. Winning in the post season would require living up to a favorite saying of their coach, Julie Filpus: ``Winners are like biscuits, when things heat up, they rise to the occasion.'' The Gremlins took that advice to heart by earning a trip to the quarterfinals with timely three point shots, accurate free throw shooting and fast break layups. On November 28th, the Gremlins packed their bags and headed downstate to Lansing to compete for a state championship. In Lansing, the Gremlins proved once more that they simply would not give up. At the end of the first half of the title game, Houghton trailed by ten points. However, the Gremlins refocused, rallied and regained their lead. Ultimately, the Lady Gremlins were victorious, eking out a 50-44 victory over the unbeaten Michigan Center. Athletics in our public schools are meant to teach young people important life lessons such as the value of teamwork and the importance of hard work. Clearly, the 2005 Houghton Gremlins embody these values. Mr. Speaker, these young women won not only a trophy, but also the admiration, respect and pride of the entire Houghton and Upper Peninsula community. I therefore commend the players, Callen Richards, Jodi Riutta, Whitney Rivest, Molly Turner, Amy Erva, Brooke Asiala, Nicole Asiala, Madeline Northey, Kristen Reed, Beth Sutherland, Josie Riutta and team captain Alyssa Polso. I also salute their coaches, Julie Filpus, Wayne Henry, Chuck LaPointe and Jen Sundstrom, for serving as role models and mentors to these talented young women. Mr. Speaker, I ask the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in saluting the Class C Michigan Basketball Champions, the Houghton Gremlins, their coaches and loyal fans.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a man who has dedicated his life to education. Dr. Michael Allkins will retire this month from Bay de Noc Community College, an institution that owes him a debt of gratitude for his tireless work to maintain, improve and strengthen not only the college, but the surrounding community. Dr. Allkins was appointed president of Bay de Noc Community College (Bay) on August 1st of 1997. During his tenure, President Allkins accomplished much, ensuring that Bay remains one of the finest community colleges in the Nation. On July 1st of 2006, his time at Bay will come to an end as he and his wife Linda begin a much deserved retirement. During his administration, Dr. Allkins presided over the completion of the Joseph Heirman University Center, remodeled the Student Center, and improved the chemistry and water technology labs on the campus. Bay was the first college in Michigan to be awarded a Michigan Technical Education Center. This innovative statewide program ensures that community colleges provide training that is relevant to the needs of local employers. It is through Dr. Allkins' leadership that Bay, in Escanaba, Michigan, was able to open the very first such technical training center in the entire state. That accomplishment alone demonstrates that Dr. Allkins is a forward thinking leader with a strategy for Bay's future. However, Dr. Allkins' accomplishments span well beyond the Technical Education Center. For over 10 years, the staff and faculty of Bay de Noc had been working to expand the college by opening a campus in neighboring Dickinson County. Under the leadership of Dr. Allkins, the college finally succeeded in passing a millage to fund the expansion and better serve Bay's growing student body 55 miles away from the main campus. Dr. Allkins was instrumental in passing the millage and breaking ground for the new facility. Dr. Allkins also led Bay through a lengthy, 10-year reaccreditation effort. This reaccreditation required improving the curriculum in general education, reviewing and assessing individual programs and making technological improvements a priority. Dr. Allkins also bolstered programs at the college that recognized the achievements of students, faculty and alumni and formalized Bay's graduation ceremonies. As any president of an educational institution must be, Dr. Allkins was also an effective ambassador for Bay. He was known for working with the Michigan Community College Association and with legislators to lay a stable financial foundation for Bay. Rural community colleges often have to assert themselves to receive their fair share of funding and Dr. Allkins was an effective advocate for Bay, working to see equitable funding for Michigan community colleges. Dr. Allkins was also involved in a variety of volunteer organizations in Escanaba and Delta counties. He served on the boards of the Delta County Area Chamber of Commerce, the Economic Development Alliance, the Upper Peninsula Great Lakes Educational Technologies, the YMCA and the Saint Francis Hospital Advisory Committee. He is an active member of the Escanaba Rotary Club. Even prior to coming to Bay de Noc Community College, Dr. Allkins had already enjoyed a career dedicated to education. As Executive Vice President of Instruction and Student Services, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and Interim President at South West Community College in Mount Gay, West Virginia, Dr. Allkins made a number of important contributions to preserving and growing that institution. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Michael Allkins has clearly made education and rural education, in particular, the focus of his career. Bay de Noc Community College and its surrounding communities are better for having enjoyed his stewardship. Because of his leadership skills and the importance of Bay de Noc Community College to the region, all of the Upper Peninsula benefited from having Dr. Michael Allkins and his wife, Linda Hirvonen, as professional citizens in our region of the country. I ask the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Dr. Michael Allkins on his retirement and in thanking him and Linda for their commitment to education and our communities.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise on this Flag Day to commend a group of my constituents who are, in their own unique way, honoring our troops and offering comfort to our war injured servicemen and servicewomen. Most people have never heard of Atlanta, Michigan. However, just because the town is small in population, does not mean it is not big on patriotism. This was demonstrated most recently by the area's Thunder Bay Quilt Guild. The Thunder Bay Quilt Guild is a group of area women who meet every Thursday to work on quilting projects. Sometimes the quilters work on their own individual projects, but often there is a special project these quilters eagerly undertake. In the past, the Guild has assisted a variety of important charities. For instance, the Guild has sewn quilts for use in neonatal hospitals to keep children between birth and four years of age warm during their stay in the hospital. While these dedicated quilters often do admirable work, most recently the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild paid tribute to our fighting men and women who have returned home from Iraq and Afghanistan and could use some basic comfort. Already, the Guild has prepared and shipped 60 ``Hero Quilts'' to Walter Reed Hospital where they are being distributed to troops who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan with injuries. Each quilt is sewn with a red, white and blue pattern and has affixed to it a simple message that reads, ``This Hero's Quilt was made for you by members of the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild. It comes with our prayers for your recovery and our heartfelt thanks for your service to our country.'' Approximately 60 women belong to the Guild and pitched in on this effort, delivering to our troops a simple reminder that, back home, they are remembered and recognized as heroes. The impetus for this idea came from Cathy McIntee, another Michigan native who had friends in the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild. Ms. McIntee's son is currently serving in Iraq and Ms. McIntee designed the first ``Hero Quilt.'' The members of the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild then rallied together in support of the cause and began sewing quilts for wounded heroes for delivery to Walter Reed. Mr. Speaker, quilting enjoys a rich heritage in American history. As the activity has evolved over the years, quilting has become a way to bring people in a community together through quilting guilds or ``quilting bees.'' Quilting is also a way to honor and preserve American history. Many of these organizations are extremely altruistic, generously donating their work to charities, the needy and others. Clearly, the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild exemplifies that tradition. Their ``Hero Quilts'' are an impressive example of how even a small community, when inspired and united, can lend support to those who need it most. As one might expect, the members of the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild are modest about their contributions. As JoEllen Moulton, one of their leading members remarked, ``Others have given so much more than us.'' Nonetheless, for the wounded servicemen and servicewomen at Walter Reed hospital, I am certain that the arrival of a handmade quilt was a pleasant surprise and a source of comfort. This contribution from the Thunder Bay Quilt Guild in the small town of Atlanta, Michigan was, indeed, a big accomplishment and, Mr. Speaker, I ask you and the U.S. House of Representatives to join me on this Flag Day in thanking these patriotic, dedicated quilters for their work.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this amendment on behalf of the Congressional Rural Caucus with my friend, Mr. Gutknecht from Minnesota. This amendment makes a good bill better. Our amendment is not controversial, it simply is a savings clause. It preserves the ability of the FCC to extend universal service fund and intercarrier compensation obligation to Voice over Internet Protocol or VoIP providers. The problem is that the underlying bill extends many new rights to VoIP providers, but extends only some of the responsibility. This leaves out the responsibility to contribute to the universal service system and pay appropriate compensation for use of the network. These two funding mechanisms have ensured that we enjoy the ubiquitous phone coverage we have today, and USF funds provide affordable broadband access for low income schools, libraries, and rural health facilities. During our hearings, Jeffrey Citron of the Vonage Holdings Company stated, and I quote: ``As a businessman, I don't get nor do I expect a free ride on anyone's network.'' Kyle McSlarrow, president and CEO of the National Cable and Telephone Association stated, ``The cable industry strongly supports the goals and purposes of universal service fund. Thus, cable operators that offer VoIP services already pay millions of dollars into the current system, and we support making that obligation to everyone.''

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, for a second time this year the Republicans are attempting to move legislation that would significantly alter Federal law regarding the refinery permitting process without a committee hearing, without a markup, without even allowing the bill to be amended on the floor. This bill is a rerun of the Gasoline for America's Security Act, the GAS Act, which was only approved by the House by two votes after the Republican leadership twisted arms and held the vote open for 45 minutes. The GAS Act was a bad bill then and this is a bad bill now. While proponents contend that the oil companies are unable to improve their refinery capacity because of excessive regulation, the truth is oil companies have intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up gas prices. I have here three memos, from Chevron, from Mobil, from Texaco, all specifically advocating that these companies, these refineries, limit their refinery capacity to drive up the price for gasoline for America. From September 2004 to September 2005 the refineries' profits increased by 255 percent. During the first quarter of 2006 Valero Energy Company, the largest refiner in the United States, recorded profits 60 percent higher than last year. Obviously, complying with Federal regulation does not present these companies with a significant financial hardship or hardship to put forth refining. By pushing refinery legislation through the House without any hearings, debate or amendments, we are doing the American people a great disservice. I encourage my Republican colleagues to address real legislation that can help the consumer at the pump rather than legislation that provides additional handouts and free rides for their friends in the oil industry. I urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 5254.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a man of honor, faith, family, and selfless service. On April 13, James (Jim) J. Vincent, Jr. lost his life when the County Rescue helicopter he was piloting had a catastrophic failure. Jim Vincent was a native of my home town of Menominee, Michigan. Jim excelled at high school sports and developed discipline, leadership, and respect at an early age. He enlisted in the United States Navy, where he spent 6 years serving his country. Wanting to become a pilot, he joined the United States Coast Guard, received world-class training, and began flying search and rescue missions. I had the pleasure of working with Jim when he moved to Traverse City, Michigan, and was based out of the Coast Guard Air Station Traverse City. On a couple of occasions I flew with Jim. His skills as a pilot were impeccable. He took his job seriously, and Jim was the consummate professional. He had an ability to relate and work well with officers, enlisted men, and civilians. He treated everyone with respect and was always willing to lend a hand. There are countless stories of Jim helping others with everything from re-wiring their homes, to work at the local American Legion, to helping friends pack up and move during relocation for work. One of the more touching stories about Jim was told by a fellow Coast Guardsman who went through officer training school with him. This cadet was at a point where he wasn't sure if he could complete the training. During one particularly difficult training task, Jim put his arm around his classmate and told him ``You know what, it's gonna be all right.'' That classmate found strength in Jim's words and managed to complete officer training school. He went on to become Cmdr. Sam Creech, who is now the operations officer at Jim's old base, Coast Guard Air Station Traverse City. After 20 years of combined service in the Navy and Coast Guard, Jim and his family moved back home to Menominee where they could be near their extended family and build their dream home. Jim, his wife Gina, their sons, Jim III and Luke, and their daughter, Vanessa, worked together on construction of their home overlooking the waters of Green Bay. They put a lot of sweat and love into the home. Jim worked for a while as a contract employee for the Navy at the Marinette Marine shipyard, just across the Michigan/Wisconsin border from Menominee. However, Jim wanted to continue to fly helicopters. In the summer of 2004 he landed a job with County Rescue flying Eagle III, an emergency air and ground transportation program, which provides Critical Care level treatments during rapid transport of critically ill or injured patients. The job was just outside Green Bay, Wisconsin, which required days away from home. Jim found the job very rewarding and by all accounts, he quickly earned the respect and admiration of his peers. While he was serious about his job, he also had a great sense of humor--often playing pranks on co-workers. Mr. Speaker, for anyone who works in the military there are significant sacrifices that their families make in terms of time away from the family. While Jim did need to spend time away from his family throughout his career, he always had a deep love for his family. Jim had a strong faith in God and was an active member of Holy Redeemer Catholic Church. He and Gina believe in the power of God. In February they attended a conference put on by Father John Corapi and Jim was fond of Father Corapi's teachings. Now, as Gina, Jim III, Luke, and Vanessa struggle to move forward with their lives, they have turned to God for strength and comfort, With this strong faith, support from family and friends, and with time, I am confident that they will find the strength to persevere. As we commemorate this Memorial Day, I am reminded of a beautiful sunny summer day in Traverse City when Jim Vincent walked across the Coast Guard hanger to greet a veteran who was seated awaiting the start of a program. As Jim approached the veteran, he reached out to shake the man's hand and simply said, ``Sir, thank you for your service to our country.'' The veteran's eyes welled with tears as he replied, ``You're welcome,'' So as I conclude Mr. Speaker let me simply say ``Jim, thank you for your service to our country.''

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, our Nation's families face a growing threat from the proliferation of child exploitation and pornography on the Internet. One in five children report having been sexually solicited on the Internet; 3.5 million pornographic images of children of American children are now estimated to be in circulation on the Internet. This is a rapidly growing problem and one which has already grown far beyond what most Americans are aware of. Last year alone, child pornography brought traffickers $20 billion in profits as compared to only $3 billion for legitimate Internet music sales. The Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on which I sit as the ranking member recently held hearings to highlight this growing threat. During the course of these hearings, members of the subcommittee had a chance to hear about the excellent work the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Cyber Crime Center is doing to combat child exploitation. Since the center was founded in 2003, less than 3 years ago, its work has resulted in arrests of over 7,500 child predators. The Cyber Crimes Center was funded at only $6 million last year, but has already been recognized as being at the forefront in fighting, in the fight against child exploitation and Internet crime. My amendment would add $5 billion to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement salaries and expenses which would be used by the Cyber Crimes Center to expand their operations. The $5 million would be offset by reduction in the Office of the Secretary, which is funded over $95 million in the base bill. I believe that this $5 million amendment is the least we can do in the fight against a $20 billion criminal industry that preys on our children. This is a chance to reward and expand the excellent law enforcement work being done at ICE and to take steps to combat the increasing threat to our children and families. If you look at the committee report, it indicates, and I quote from the committee report in support of this legislation here today, this year, the committee notes gaps in funding for drug interdiction, human smuggling, cyber crimes, child pornography, Secret Service investigations and funding for our first responders. The committee recommendation includes $5 million, the same as fiscal year 2006, for memory and technology support for the Cyber Crimes Center. We are doing what the committee is asking us to do. Who are the victims of child pornography? Eighty percent of these predators have material depicting children under the age of 12; 40 percent under the age of 6; and 20 percent are victims under the age of 3. Victims are 28 times more likely to become prostitutes; 86 percent of the victims develop serious long-term mental illness. Mr. Chairman, we are working on this amendment here tonight, and we are taking it from the Secretary's budget, and I am sure that the chairman will once again say we are going to take this Secretary away and have nothing left. Well, there is $95 million. We want $5 million, because this is a growing problem. It has been by leaps and bounds. In fact, we are doing more hearings as soon as we get back first part of June. We have had hearings in which 15,000 names, addresses, credit cards, Internet provider addresses were turned over to the Department of Justice, and nothing is done because the resources are not there to follow through. So reality is that Internet child pornography and exploitation is growing more rampant, more horrific, and more sophisticated. The Cyber Crimes Unit employees know all too well how daunting their job is. We owe it to these dedicated men and women to give them all the resources we can. This additional $5 million will make a meaningful difference. The appropriations bill, while an increase over the President's request, essentially has flat funded this program. I thank the committee for their continued commitment, and I know we have to make some tough decisions, but this is one we should do for America's children and to stop this horrific crime of child exploitation and pornography over the Internet.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Reclaiming my time, with that regard I will be withdrawing my amendment. I would also thank both the chairman, Mr. Hobson, and the ranking member, Mr. Visclosky, for their support on this issue. Hopefully, we will be able to pass a WRDA bill and go to conference and have it pass this year so the language that we are looking for will be included. I look forward to working with the committee and these gentlemen on this issue. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, beginning in fiscal year 2005, the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Office of Management and Budget began implementing new guidelines for including in their budget for operation and maintenance dredging of commercial harbors. Unfortunately, this new policy significantly limits dredging of harbors in rural communities including several communities in my northern Michigan district. In fiscal year 2006, the corps excluded harbors that moved less than a million tons of cargo each year. For fiscal year 2007, the corps is using a similar tonnage base standard, requiring that dredging projects cost less than $2 per ton of product moved annually. By using a standard based on tonnage, harbors that do not move a large amount of tonnage but are still important to the economic success of rural areas are excluded from the President's budget. As a result, a number of routine Army Corps harbor dredging projects across the country will not be carried out. In fiscal year 2006, there were 293 harbors in the United States classified as low use. These harbors were not included in the corps budget, even though they have been in previous years, simply because of this unfair budget standard; 293 communities are impacted by this devastating new policy. An example of how this policy affects communities in my district, Ontonagan, Michigan, residents were taken by surprise when last year, for the first time in many years, the harbor was not included in the President's budget. Not dredging this harbor will have significant effect on the future of our paper company, Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation, which relies on the harbor for coal and limestone deliveries. White pine power, a revitalized coal plant that depends on the harbor for coal deliveries for power generation in an area that is underserved with electricity will also be jeopardized. In addition, annual dredging helps prevent flooding in Ontonagon, helping to prevent the devastating private property loss and damage. While this port does not meet the corps' new standard, dredging plays an essential role in preserving the economy, electric generation and protecting this community; 293 communities in the United States have similar concerns. This policy is not just detrimental to these rural communities. In setting this policy, the corps also disregards the fact that approximately two-thirds of all shipping in the United States either starts or finishes at small ports. By ignoring the needs of these communities, the corps is also significantly harming the Nation's economy. The House is on record that the corps' neglect of our rural harbors is unwise and unreasonable. During consideration of the Water Resources Development Act last July, my amendment to require the corps to fund harbor dredging projects based on standards used in fiscal year 2004 was included in the WRDA bill. While the WRDA bill is unfortunately being held up in the Senate, this policy continues to threaten the economies of those cities that depend on these ports. Therefore, if I may enter into a brief colloquy with the chairman, does the chairman of the subcommittee share my concerns that the corps' new dredging policy is misguided and harms our rural economies? Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment based upon the colloquy and comments here today.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. STUPAK

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, during a 48-hour period last week, the House Republican majority once again demonstrated why they cannot govern. After weeks of arm twisting and two failed attempts to bring up a budget, the Republican leadership finally forced a vote late last Wednesday. Democrats stood united against the budget. Republicans were forcing major cuts in education, veterans, health and environmental programs. Also, they would continue to shower millionaires with tax breaks. Nevertheless, the Republican budget passed. Two days later, they saw the implications of that vote when a small group of House Republicans stripped $50 million out of the military construction and veterans appropriations bill because the funding did not fit into the budget that they passed 2 days before. House Republicans have nobody to blame but themselves. They are the ones who continue to put the needs of the wealthiest few above the needs of our veterans, our military personnel, our children and our environment. The sad fact is that what America witnessed last Friday afternoon will be repeated over and over again here on the House floor until Republicans finally realize that their fiscal policies are out of sync with this Nation.