Christopher Shays

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. I wonder if the gentlelady would yield?

Mr. SHAYS. Not to take another 5 minutes, the statistics that you present are what I would want to share. As cochair of the NEA, I want to say how proud I am to be able to vote for a budget that finally is beginning to pay attention to the arts.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, on March 30, 1973, American combat troops serving in Vietnam completed their service and returned home to the U.S. After 8 years of hard-fought battle and the loss of over 58,000 soldiers, we welcomed our servicemen and women home and wished them a safe return. Over 300,000 troops returned wounded during the war. House Res. 189 seeks to establish March 30 as Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day. It is an opportunity to recognize the heroic service of these many veterans. For fear that Southeast Asia would fall into communism, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in 1964, thereby giving powers to President Johnson to conduct military command in South Vietnam until peace and security had returned to the war-torn nation. One year later, U.S. combat troops were sent to the embattled country. By 1969, approximately 543,000 American troops were in Vietnam. Thousands of Vietnam veterans participated in various festivities, parades and reunions every year. We see them proudly wear their unit numbers, banners, T-shirts and hats covered with pins, sharing stories and updating each other on their lives. It is only fitting that we show our support for these brave men and women by expressing our gratitude for their courageous service. Around 3 million people visit the Vietnam Veterans Memorial each year. The wall and two accompanying sculptures offer an opportunity to learn about and appreciate the history of the war and its numerous casualties. It is appropriate to commemorate this significant piece of history by recognizing the day combat troops returned home from war as welcome home Vietnam Veterans' Day.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I just would again urge passage. I think this is a very thoughtful thing of our colleague from California to have initiated. Frankly, I wonder why we didn't think of it sooner. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today we stand with 69 million households in celebrating the joy of pet ownership and recognizing the obligations of responsible animal care as we call on this Congress to establish a National Pet Week. Some 63 percent of Americans have accepted the calling of pet ownership and have opened their homes to millions of cats, dogs, birds, fish, and other animals. For this generous action, they are rewarded with love, companionship and support. Studies have shown an additional benefit of pet ownership include a healthier life. A National Pet Week would also honor those who provide medical treatment as well as responsible care for animals, who are certainly deserving of such treatment. There are approximately 75,000 practicing veterinarians in the United States who perform a great service for this country by giving preventative and emergency care for animals. These veterinarians are also credited with educating pet owners about the benefits of spaying or neutering their animals, thus curbing pet overpopulation problems in the country. Establishing a week recognizing pet ownership helps highlight many of the issues affecting pets and owners in America, as well as the issue of responsible treatment for animals in general. Sadly, problems such as animal abuse, neglect, overpopulation, hoarding, and organized fighting persist in this country. The people of the United States are indebted to the animal protection and humane organizations who promote respect for animals and provide care for lost, unwanted, abused, and abandoned animals. It is the essential duty of a civilized society to teach its children the value of kindness and respect toward all living creatures, and this is the perfect opportunity to do so. Therefore, I call on my colleagues to support the establishment of National Pet Week, to celebrate pet ownership, recognize those who provide responsible animal care, and educate our children about a standard of respect towards all living creatures. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from D.C. and look forward to the time that she will be a full Member of this Chamber, with all the rights and privileges. Much as been said about the life of Jack Valenti, and rightfully so. It is impossible to sum up his great life and achievements in the short time we have today. He held powerful influence on both coasts in the United States, in Washington, D.C., where he served as a political adviser to President Johnson, and in Hollywood, where he served as chief lobbyist of the Motion Picture Association of America. Valenti negotiated both power centers with dignity, determination and deference. He was born to Houston, Texas, as was pointed out, the grandson of Sicilian immigrants. He excelled in school and finished high school at an early age. Unable to afford college, he worked for a short time in a movie theater, then at an oil company, until he could afford night classes at the University of Houston. His leadership skills, solidified at college, and he was elected student body president. From there, he went on to earn his MBA from Harvard University. His interest in politics began during a chance meeting with President Johnson, who was looking to reach out to fellow Texans while serving in the Senate. At the meeting, Jack Valenti was fascinated by Johnson and chose to work on his next campaign in Texas. They kept in touch, and he was soon employed by Johnson when he became Vice President. Jack Valenti was inspired by the Vice President and viewed him as a mentor. Valenti was in the presidential motorcade as it traveled through downtown Dallas, Texas on that fateful tragic day of November 22, 1963, when President Kennedy was assassinated. He said later that that day changed his life forever. Indeed, he became President Johnson's special assistant, and even lived in the White House during the early months of the new President's term. He left the White House when he was approached by two Hollywood studio executives to take over their fledgling trade group. With a pay raise almost impossible to turn down, he accepted the position and became the chief lobbyist for the Motion Picture Association of America in 1966. He revitalized the film rating system, bringing it into line with current culture. It is a system which has remained intact, other than modifications Valenti also helped put in place for decades. Through the years, movies and technologies changed and progressed, as did his work. He helped the industry thrive even as television and home videos chipped away its dominance. He fought digital piracy and other threats to the film industry. Valenti left MPAA in 2004, but he remained active in the public stage. He concentrated on the world health issues such as AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. He helped devise the technology by which parents control what programs their children watch. He continued this work almost until the day in April when he died. He leaves behind his wife of 45 years, three children and two grandchildren. He also leaves behind a legacy of service of principled advocacy and of human warmth appreciated by all who had the privilege of knowing him. His character, his warm personality and his deep southern accent all will be missed as much his has legacy in the worlds of film and public policy. Mr. Speaker, with that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague in urging passage of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. First I want to salute Mrs. Lowey. I think you have done a very fine job on this legislation. I know you are focused on a lot of issues, and I congratulate you for that. We have disagreement on a few items in a very significant bill. I have strong concern about the lack of any dollars for economic development in the fiscal year 2008 budget, and that is what we are talking about. We are not talking about an emergency supplemental, which, by the way, has lots of strings attached, which may mean, ironically, money may not be spent ever. We Republicans and Democrats, want to succeed in Iraq, economically, politically, socially and militarily. We want to succeed. The challenge is I feel like we are pulling the rug out from under the chance to succeed economically and politically. The reason why I say ``politically'' is I have been there before, during and after the elections. This money helped educate the Iraqis on how to have elections. They did their elections better than we do our elections in the United States. When I was outside the umbrella of the military, people would say, why have you put my father, my uncle, my brother, my cousin, my son out of work, when we abolished all of their military. So when I hear we spent $18 billion to reconstitute their military, that is not a large number. It is money that had to be used because of what we did. We attacked them. They did not attack us. We have a moral obligation, I believe, to put Iraq in a better place. If we don't do it economically and politically, any effort militarily fails. I mean no disrespect, but it is almost like there is an interest in having Iraq fail, so all the predictions that it will fail will be proven right. We need to prove ourselves wrong. We need to succeed. These dollars should be, in my judgment, in the 2008 account, not in an emergency supplemental, whether now or in the future. The administration asked for $458 million. We asked the NGO's to say, what are your absolute needs for economic support, the rule of law, governance and democracy? And they have come back to us and said, we need $158 million. I just hope that the gentlewoman in her wisdom will reconsider her decisions.

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

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would provide $1 million to the U.S. Institute of Peace, referred to as USIP, for the purposes of reestablishing the Iraq Study Group (ISG). We want the ISG to revisit Iraq to evaluate the condition in Iraq 1 year later, to look at their findings and compare them to a year ago, and to look at their recommendations to see where they might alter them. That is what the amendment does. I have spoken to Richard Solomon at the U.S. Institute of Peace, who said the Institute is prepared to do this, to reconstitute its expert working groups. This would be done at the same time that we are going to hear from Ambassador Ryan Crocker and General David Petraeus, who will be giving us their findings. But the Institute wanted to make clear they would not be there to look at and evaluate the Crocker-Petraeus findings and recommendations, but it would simply be a report that would be provided at the same time to which people then could compare. I spoke to one of the principals of the Iraq Study Group, Lee Hamilton. He said he is willing to take this effort on, provided it is to review what they did, to look at what has taken place in Iraq, to review their observations, their findings and their recommendations, but they would not be eager to take the Petraeus-Crocker report and analyze it. It would be done so there would be two instruments that Congress could look at. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say to the gentlewoman, thank you very much. I would point out that the Iraq Study Group was an instrument created by both sides of the aisle, but particularly by Mr. Wolf. It is a bipartisan effort, and it would be good to continue this bipartisan effort. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I thank Representative Lowey and Representative Wolf, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. SHAYS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and again, Mrs. Lowey, thank you for a well-drafted bill, but this is an area in which I have some concern. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would designate $50 million in Economic Support Funds for the Community Action Programs, also known as CAP in Iraq. The CAP program directly engages Iraqis in reconstructing their own communities while building a nationwide grassroots constituency for democracy. Typical CAP projects use both U.S. and Iraqi funds and resources to rebuild schools, repair water and sewage lines, build health clinics, as well as a host of other infrastructure and development projects. The CAP agencies are Mercy Corps; IRD, International Relief and Development; CHF International; ACDI/VOCA Counterpart; and in the past, Save the Children. Since 2003, six of USAID's NGO partners have implemented this program in all 18 governorates of Iraq. In order to maintain the security of staff and win the trust of Iraqi communities, the implementers and USAID have largely run the program under the radar. As a result, not enough people are aware of the remarkable success story that CAP represents. Here are just a few highlights: CAP has successfully managed more than 6,000 reconstruction and development projects and created more than 2.7 million days of employment and 34,000 long-term jobs with 43 percent of those jobs going to women, Iraqi women. A January 2005 audit report from the USAID regional inspector general, Baghdad, stated: ``Based on tests performed on 89 statistically selected sample projects, the CAP achieved 98 percent of its intended outputs.'' I am going to read that again: ``Based on tests performed on 89 statistically selected sample projects, the CAP achieved 98 percent of its intended outputs.'' Communities are contributing between 15 and 25 percent of the value of each project. That is Iraqis contributing. This contribution is often in the form of labor, in-kind materials, or other provisions. In my travels to Iraq, I have seen firsthand how the CAP program improves the lives of Iraqis and most importantly how it helps us accomplish our mission of creating a secure environment for the Iraqi people so democracy can prosper. It would be a terrible waste to turn our backs on such a great investment. In fact, this is exactly the time to nurture and build on the relationships CAP partners have forged with communities. Furthermore, CAP provides the foundation and the constituency at the community level that will help ensure the success of other State Department civil society programs. The CAP program has enjoyed strong support from the Appropriations Committee, Republicans and Democrats alike, in the past. An amendment we offered during last year's supplemental appropriations act to increase CAP funding by $10 million was accepted by the committee. The committee noted in its report last year that ``CAP provides a vehicle for empowering communities, building community cohesion and providing evidence that the U.S. is committed to improving the lives of Iraqis.'' We are asking for $50 million to be designated within Economic Support Funds to ensure the agencies can expand and improve the valuable projects they've been implementing for the last several years. Mr. Chairman, I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say to you, there is no money in the 2008 budget, fiscal year 2008 budget. The challenge we have is that this is the one program, more than any others, that works. It shouldn't be tied to any benchmarks because implementing this program, expanding it actually, will make it easier for all those benchmarks to be realized. I am not trying to bring more attention to this program. I just think it needs to be funded and expanded and this is the vehicle to do it. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, just so the debate is a little more accurate, and we will see how the vote turns out whether I ask for a roll call vote or not, would it not be fair to say that they can live with the money they have, but they would like to have more and they could use more and do more with it? This is not a trick question, but I want to make sure for the record we don't make it seem like they have all that they need and can use well. If the answer to that first question is yes, my second question would be, would it be the intent of the gentlewoman from New York to consider funding this program at an amount that will enable them to do at least what they are doing now in fiscal year 2008, and possibly more?

Mr. SHAYS. If the gentlewoman will yield further, you are making me more concerned rather than less by your honesty. Could I ask the gentlewoman to respond to her intent on how she will be looking to fund this issue? This is the one program that is in fact working in Iraq. No one disputes it. We can dispute everything else, but not this. My interest is what your intentions are in the future as it relates not to Iraq in general or military forces, but the CAP agency program?

Mr. SHAYS. I thank the gentlelady for yielding to me. I oppose the Pitts amendment. I support strongly the attempt by the subcommittee to give the President flexibility to implement prevention programs that fit the countries' current AIDS epidemic. I salute the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief. I have been to Africa, Uganda, and Tanzania to see how the program works. Everyone I spoke with pleaded with us to make sure that there was more emphasis on not A, B, but on C, condoms. Young children were asking that this be a factor in their schools. They said sex is going to happen no matter what you say. No matter what you say about abstinence or be faithful, it's going to happen. It is particularly disconcerting to think that someone who has chosen one partner and loves that partner, not knowing that that partner has been unfaithful, and, in fact, has AIDS, transmitting that disease to, in most cases, a young woman. This makes eminent sense. I would like to think that we could get our religious beliefs out of this issue, not talking practically, but talking realistically. If you want to prevent deaths, you need to allow more condoms. If you want to save lives, you need to allow more condoms. If you want to prevent pregnancies, you need to allow more condoms. If you don't want so much interest on other things like whether there should be abortion, you need to have condoms. I weep thinking young kids go to school without teachers and go home without parents. We need to be doing more in Africa to spend our money better. Thank you, Mrs. Lowey, for what you have done to give the President of these United States the flexibility with his team that puts PEPFAR into operation.

Mr. SHAYS

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

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make sure the Clerk has the proper amendment. Maybe she should read it.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank Mr. Price for the work he has done on this legislation, and Mr. Rogers. I know we are going to be spending a lot more money, but this is Homeland Security, and I intend to support this legislation. The amendment would appropriate $100,000 to allow the Department of Homeland Security, DHS, and the International Criminal Police Organization, Interpol, to share counterterrorism and stolen and lost travel document information. The DHS Secretary has already publicly stated he hopes to integrate the Interpol information at points of entry. This amendment simply provides funding for that stated activity. The funding would provide the necessary startup costs for the minimum IT equipment to set up the data sharing, as well as additional funds to facilitate travel and professional exchanges. Interpol currently maintains a database of 14.4 million lost and stolen internationally recognized travel documents from 123 countries. This includes 67 million passports, of which over a third are from countries that participate in the visa waiver program. Interpol currently has a list of over 48,000 blank passports that have been stolen around the world. Blank passports are better than blank checks for terrorists, as the 9/11 Commission rightly concluded. For terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons. I will just conclude by saying in a test of 1.9 million passport records collected over 15 days by U.S. border officials, DHS identified 273 lost or stolen documents used in Interpol data, 64 of which could not be resolved. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Madam Speaker, on May 28, 2007, millions of Americans across the country recognized the brave men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice while fighting to protect the citizens and freedom of our great Nation. In recognition of Memorial Day, LT. Zach Alessi-Friedlander gave an address at a Memorial Day Ceremony at Hillside Cemetery in Wilton, Connecticut. I submit the text of LT. Alessi-Friedlander's remarks to be entered into the Record. We come together on this solemn occasion to commemorate the sacrifice and celebrate the legacy of those Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, and Airmen who have lost their lives while serving our great Nation. When the leaders of the Wilton Memorial Day parade committee--especially Mr. Toothaker and Mr. Brautigam as well as Mr. Dartley of the VFW--invited me to speak at this ceremony, I embraced the opportunity because it would give me a forum through which to speak with you all about service--a truly timeless value that is integral to the vibrancy of our society. My purpose here today is to provide a Soldiers'-eye- view on the value of service--drawn not only from my own experiences but from those of the extraordinary Soldiers with whom I have had the great privilege of serving alongside. Nine years ago, I was 17 years old and a week from my high school graduation. To me, the world seemed pregnant with opportunity and possibility. Over much of these last nine years, my personal journey has been largely defined by abstract intellectual pursuits--college, internships, and even a semester of graduate school. But in early 2004, I felt a growing sense of discomfort. So much was unfolding outside the classrooms and libraries in which I spent so much of my time. I was almost 23 and I felt the need to be a part of something that was larger and more important than me. I then made the decision to pursue a commission in the Army. At the time, in response to the queries of friends and family, I could only describe my motivations in an abstract sense. But over the last two and half years, the reasons for my decision to serve have been made clearer through the crucible of experience. After attending Basic Training and Officer Candidate School, I was commissioned as a Field Artillery lieutenant. Sixty-five years ago, on the conventional battlefields of World War II, I would have been responsible for planning and coordinating the artillery, mortars, aerial firepower, and naval gunfire needed to support my troop commander's scheme of maneuver. However, the battlefields of Iraq are--at this stage of the war--decidedly different from their World War II counterparts. Conventional schemes of maneuver have been replaced with the unconventional strategies and tactics needed to manage an elusive and adaptive enemy within an asymmetric and three-dimensional battlefield. Coalition Forces are grappling with a multi-faceted insurgency--divided along different ethno-sectarian and ideological lines. The fight for key terrain and the push to force the enemy to formally surrender have been replaced with the fight for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi local nationals--the people upon whom the burden of a free and secure Iraq will ultimately rest. What I'm talking about is our effort to diversify the scope of the ``fight'' in order to create a foundation upon which the Iraqi people can rebuild a society less vulnerable to virulent strands of militant Islam and sectarian antipathy. More specifically, we now complement our combat operations with four additional lines of operation: training Iraqi Security Forces; promoting local governance; restoring essential services; and developing the economy. This is a long, tough, unpredictable process that is at times frustrating and at other times exhilarating. Over the last nine months, my troop has been able to develop our sector through a strategy that depends fundamentally upon earning the genuine trust of the local nationals living within our sector. Many of you, I am sure, have heard about many of these new emphases--especially after the recent appointment of General David Petreaus as the new theater commander in Iraq. However, experiencing it on the ground is a truly perspective-altering experience. My unit's progress--especially over the past 5 months--has been startling. In this period, we have poured several million dollars worth of projects into the small villages dotting our sector--providing services like trash collection and replacing dilapidated infrastructure such as a drinking- water tower and power-line transformers. But our most successful-civil military initiatives have been those which have integrated our Soldiers, members of either the Iraqi Army or Iraqi National Police, and the local nationals into combined community projects. Examples of such initiatives include: two medical-assistance visits during which our medics and doctors were able to provide medicine, care, diagnoses, and treatment advice to almost 400 local nationals; as well as something called a ``VET CAP'' during which an Army veterinarian was able to treat and de-worm 150 sheep and 20 cows. But, the civil-military initiatives of which I am most proud are the efforts that have enabled us to promote truly indigenous forms of self-government. In December, when we recognized that local nationals residing in our sector were unwilling to participate in the regional branches of the Iraqi government--called Nahia and Qada councils--we decided to host a series of village-level town-hall meetings. At these meetings, we were able to identify community leaders with the initiative, technical expertise, and will to represent the other members of the villages. These town-hall meetings served as jumping-off points for two major developments. A group of local nationals in our largest village now regularly attend the Nahia council meetings, which allows them to interface with the Iraqi government. But, perhaps more impressively, this same group created a Farmers' Cooperative, whose leaders now represent farmers from throughout our entire area of operations. But, make no mistake, our unit has been forced to combat an adaptive, innovative, patient, and committed insurgent threat intent on disrupting our efforts through a series of persistent attacks against us and--perhaps more ominously--by casting a specter of fear over the local-national population whom we are attempting to secure and whose trust we are working to earn. Our military has been largely built and trained to fight high-intensity conflicts using technological superiority and mobility to combat nation states. My unit is a cavalry troop composed of field artilleryman, cavalry scouts, and infantrymen--all of whom were initially trained to play specific roles in a conventional fight. But, every day, I am amazed at how our Soldiers have been able to adapt to the changing nature of the fight. My preceding remarks were an effort to provide the context necessary for you all to appreciate the service of the Soldiers alongside whom I proudly serve. General Robert E. Lee once described duty--the close cousin of service--as the most sublime word in the English language. I would argue that he was trying to explain that duty and service as concepts are impossible to understand in an abstract intellectual sense; rather, in order to wrap our minds around this simple but crucial civic value, we need to discuss specific examples--and that will be the intent of the balance of my remarks. The key to the success that my unit has experienced has been the influence of our extraordinary non-commissioned officers. For those of you with prior military experience, you know that at troop or company levels, NCOs have dramatically more time in service--and thus experience--than their commissioned-officer counterparts. Therefore, the key to a successful unit is to develop a synergy between the NCO and Officer Corps. Each officer-NCO pair must understand the role that the other plays in training, planning, and operations and must then work to complement their counterpart in every phase of mission preparation and execution. In my troop, the only Soldiers with previous combat experience are the NCOs. Two in particular come to mind: SFC Richardson and SSG Mont-Eton, the platoon sergeant and senior scout for our 2nd platoon--the element whom I would argue has helped to establish the model by which a counterinsurgency must be fought. Perhaps the most illuminating parts of my deployment have come while riding alongside SSG Monty in his truck. Over the course of any given patrol, he spends time instructing his gunner on how to more effectively scan the key pieces of terrain with his optics; teaching his driver on how to scan the road for the command-wire-IED initiators that are carefully concealed alongside the routes in our sector; and positioning his dismount on where he must stand to establish the most effective security when the platoon gets out of the trucks. But SSG Monty's true gift is his uncanny ability to establish rapport with the local nationals upon whose trust the entire troop depends in order to rebuild the communities and counter the insurgent threats. Smoking cigarettes and drinking coffee constantly, SSG Monty can approach any individual in our sector, and, within a matter of minutes, they are exchanging stories about their children or talking about how to improve water flow in a nearby irrigation canal. Never in my life, not at Columbia nor at Harvard, have I ever encountered an individual with more practical intelligence-- with the ability to adapt doctrine or theory to a real-world operating environment, which, in our case, carries life and death significance. As for SFC Richardson, he is simply a force of nature. He is the tactical expert upon whom his platoon leader relies to carefully plan any deliberate operation. Riding in the 4-truck, the platoon's trail vehicle, he has managed the evacuation of all Soldiers injured on patrol with a sense of calm and poise that has allowed the platoon to address potentially catastrophic situations with the speed and efficiency needed to ensure the safety of all involved. The Soldiers in his platoon trust him implicitly and would literally follow him wherever he decided to go. He is the most senior Soldier in the entire troop, with even more years in service than our first sergeant; he has used this seniority to be the forceful and articulate voice on all Soldier issues. When his guys are smoked, he goes to my commander and first sergeant, and tells them the platoon needs a day of refit . . . and they listen. SFC Richardson was the one who insisted upon explaining to the local-national children, who gathered to receive their soccer balls, why Nick's name had been inscribed on each of their gifts. Into his leadership style, SFC Richardson has managed to fold toughness, moral authority, compassion, and intelligence--or, more specifically, the ability to think critically about and to respond swiftly to unpredictable and challenging situations. And then there's the amazing symbiosis that my commander and first sergeant have been able to establish. They are the only command pair in my entire squadron not to have previously deployed to either Afghanistan or Iraq since combat operations began in those places in 2001 and 2003, respectively. However, they have not allowed this relative inexperience to adversely affect our troop's operations. Rather, they have approached our campaign plan with a refreshing open-mindedness, rigorous planning process, and strict attention to detail that have helped to keep our Soldiers safe and our unit mission effective. I have still only spoken in relatively general terms thus far, but I want to share with you a specific example from our deployment that I believe demonstrates the courage and discipline of our Soldiers and, more generally, illuminates the value of service. In mid-October, after only a month in our sector, our infantry platoon was conducting dismounted night-time reconnaissance of a piece of key terrain. The 8- man dismounted element had just embarked on their patrol when their senior scout, SSG Hurlbutt, stepped on an anti-tank mine. He was blown off the ground and sent hurtling 15 feet through the air into a reed-choked and half-filled irrigation canal. Without hesitating, the dismounted team leader, SGT Love, and one of the other members of the patrol, SPC Conolly, immediately jumped into the canal and extracted--up its steep and slippery banks--their severely injured platoon mate--who, between the weight of his body, protective armor, weapon, and gear weighed more than 300 pounds. While they administered first aid, the platoon leader, lLT Kimes, who was the trail man in the patrol, positioned the balance of the element in a security perimeter and coordinated for the MEDEVAC. (And, this provides me with an opportunity to praise again the technical skill and courage of Chief Reeves and the other MEDEVAC pilots upon us guys on the ground constantly rely.) Some people may be inclined to attribute the way in which the ``rock lizards'' were able to handle this situation to their training, but I am more inclined to attribute it to their courage and commitment to one another. As for SSG Hurlbutt, he is an extraordinary Soldier among many extraordinary Soldiers. Just prior to the deployment, he was given. the option of deploying late or not deploying at all in order to care for his wife, who had only recently recovered from a very serious illness. Despite his concern for his wife, he declined the offer, understanding that his previous combat experience and deep knowledge were essential to helping his platoon transition to operations in theater. And then, in January, when my commander returned to Fort Drum, where my unit is based, for his mid-tour leave, he visited SSG Hurlbutt, who is still recovering from his injuries. In the months between sustaining the injury and my commander's visit, SSG Hurlbutt had received skin grafts to replace the skin and tissue destroyed by the mine's intense heat and he was undergoing excruciating physical therapy to recover from the chunk of flesh and muscle that he lost from his left thigh. Despite all this and despite the fact that he was barely ambulatory at the time of my commander's visit, he amazingly started campaigning to return to sector before we redeployed. And then there's SPC Jonathan Cadavero. SPC Cadavero was my good friend and we were in the same company at Officer Candidate School. Throughout the first half of the course, he began to have reservations about continuing his pursuit of an officer's commission--but never once questioned his desire to serve. After successfully completing the land-navigation course and receiving top marks on his academic testing and leadership evaluations, he recognized that he had met and exceeded the standards required to become an officer. He then felt that he could leave Officer Candidate School without feeling that he was dodging a challenge. He decided that he preferred to fulfill his obligations to the Army as an enlisted medic rather than as an officer, which meant less pay and decision-making authority; but, he did not care about that; he simply wanted to serve his country in Iraq. I remember having long conversations with him about his decision in our barracks at Ft Benning. I told him that he needed to make the decision with which he felt most comfortable; either way, he would have the opportunity to serve--a motivation we both proudly shared and embraced. The next time we met was at Bradley's, the tailor shop just outside of Ft Drum; we were both having nametapes sewn on our boonie caps, assault packs, and ruck sacks in preparation for the deployment of our brigade. We talked informally about our families; about finally being in the regular Army after more than a year in various Army schools; about the long and challenging deployment that hovered on the horizon. Over the next 6 months, we met randomly on Camp Striker--at the gym, at the chow hall, around our living quarters--each time sharing warm conversation, sometimes about the Army, but usually just about baseball. On February 27th, while acting as the platoon medic for a route-clearance element operating in support of my unit's sister troop, he was killed when an IED detonated under the truck in which he was riding. This device was buried deep under the paved surface of the road on which he was traveling, and, when it detonated, it completely destroyed his truck and killed all of the occupants. I remember seeing his name listed among the casualties. At first, everything seemed to collapse with the pain I felt for his loss, for his family, friends, and fellow Soldiers. And then everything seemed to explode in a rush of memories--wandering through the woods of Ft Benning in our desperate attempts to find our points on the land-navigation course or cracking jokes before the dreaded arrival of our supervisors at the ridiculous light-out ritual each night. I remember his distinctive New York accent, his infectious smile, his wit, his intelligence, his unwavering desire to serve his country as a Soldier during wartime. His sacrifice and sense of duty should be an inspiration to his fellow Soldiers and to the country he proudly served, but these are no comfort to his family and friends. The memory of his loss is still too fresh. The loss of each service member sends ripples of pain throughout communities; those closest to him are touched in a way that is impossible for most of us to imagine. Most can sympathize but not really empathize. This is the fundamental challenge of Memorial Day: once a year, we have the opportunity to congregate as a community and as a society to commemorate their sacrifice--but perhaps more importantly--to celebrate their legacy. I would encourage everyone to find the name of an individual Soldier, Marine, Airman, or Sailor, who has lost their life while serving their country; give that name and the magnitude of their sacrifice specific attention. This will help us to humanize the sacrifice that spans generations. This sacrifice and service connect us all in a tragic but crucial narrative. Ours is a country built upon the value of service and it should be celebrated--even if it must be done with a somber tone and painful heart. I know that on every Memorial Day from this day forward, I'll take the opportunity to reflect on the life and sacrifice of SPC Cadavero. Rare is this profession of arms for its whole essence is built upon a foundation of specifically conceptualized values that are intended to discipline individual Soldiers into a coherent and selfless team. The only constants that Soldiers will ever have are the support of their fellow Soldiers, the value of their service, and the appreciation of the grateful nation whom they serve. Soldiers have always been asked to sacrifice their comforts and desires for the sake of the team and for the mission. Unlike the civilian world, Soldiers are required to see their commitment through to the end regardless of the extenuating circumstances that may arise after making the oath of enlistment or commission. I am awed by the courage and service of my Soldiers, by their ability to manage their myriad personal and family concerns while negotiating the constant threats to their safety that lurk ominously every time we leave the wire in Iraq. The purpose of Memorial Day is for our nation to recognize and express their appreciation for this service, in general, and the sacrifice of those that have lost their lives while serving, more specifically. I ask only that we, as a community, embrace this opportunity to contemplate seriously what this service and sacrifice have meant in the development of our country and in the expression of our shared values.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Madam Speaker, on May 17 through May 22 I missed votes due to my being out of the country to conduct oversight of our operations in Iraq. Had I been present for rollcall 378, the Bachus Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 379, the Hensarling Amendment No. 29 to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 380, the McHenry Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 381, the Kanjorski Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 382, the Roskam Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 383, the Garrett Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 384, H.R. 698, the Industrial Bank Holding Company Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 385, H.R. 1425, the Staff Sergeant Marvin Rex Young Post Office Building, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 386, the Feeney Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 387, the Price (GA) Amendment No. 8 to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 388, the Sessions Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 389, the Brady Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 390, the Price (GA) Amendment No. 9 to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 391, the Doolittle Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 392, the Hensarling Amendment No. 30 to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 393, the Neugebauer Amendment to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 394, the Neugebauer Amendment No. 4 to H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 395, on the Motion to Recommit H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``no.'' Had I been present for rollcall 396, on final passage of H.R. 1427, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 397, S. 214, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 398, H.R. 2264, the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 399, S. 1104, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 400, H.R. 2399, the Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 401, H.R. 1722, the Leonard W. Herman Post Office, I would have voted ``yes.'' Had I been present for rollcall 402, a motion to table H. Res. 428, I would have voted ``no.''