Christopher Shays

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, today we are debating a Constitutional amendment drafted not to protect my marriage or my family--I see no reasonable way to argue it would--but rather to explicitly deny a portion of our society the right to marry and the benefits that accompany that kind of partnership. I do not advocate the legalization of gay marriage, but our Constitution is simply not the proper place to set this kind of social policy. I believed back in 1996, when I voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, and I still believe today, the decision about whether to recognize gay marriage should be left to the states. I can't help but wonder . . . Why are we doing this? What are we so afraid of? Gay men and women pass through our lives every day. There are wonderful teachers and leaders and role models who happen to be gay and sometimes we don't even know they're gay. I wouldn't be a Member of Congress today if it weren't for an extraordinary teacher I had in High School 40 years ago. I learned years later he was gay and that he had commuted from Connecticut to Washington, DC, every weekend in part to protect his privacy and his job. When I went to college, my understanding of gay people was impacted again by my wife's best friend. One day, she told us she too had found the love of her life. We were eager to meet the boyfriend she was so madly in love with, but we soon learned her love was not a he, but a she. Once we got over our surprise and our ways of thinking about relationships, we were able to sincerely rejoice in the joy they brought each other because we knew what a dear and good person our friend is. My perception of gay people evolved further during my first campaign for Congress, when I worked with a magnificent young man named Carl Brown. He became my friend and he gave me another gay face to know. Carl has since passed away, but I remember him as a person of exceptional dignity and grace. My teacher, my wife's best friend and Carl helped me understand their lives and I think made me a better person in the process. The Constitution of the United Staets--which established our government, grants us free speech and gives all citizens the right to vote--should not be dishonored by this effort to write indiscrimination. I am sensitive to some of my colleague's concerns about potential biblical and social implications of legalizing same-size marriage, but I oppose this proposed amendment because I believe the Constitution is not the proper instrument to set--or reject--such policy. That debate should happened in our state legislatures.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased the day has come that Congress can officially congratulate Israel's Magen David Adom Society for achieving full membership in the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Since the Knesset ratified the Magen David Adom Law in 1950, the Society has functioned as Israel's National Red Cross Society. While acting in accordance with the Geneva Convention, Magen David Adom has maintained a national civilian blood bank and has also provided emergency first-aid services and temporary shelter in emergency situations. As Israel has defended itself against terrorist attacks, the Magen David Adom Society has been there to bravely and heroically provide humanitarian assistance to all those in need. Yet despite its clear and undeniable accordance with the principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, until recently Magen David Adom was refused admission into the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and has been relegated to observer status without a vote because it has used the Red Shield of David. As such, it was the only such national organization denied membership in the Movement. In 2005, the Government of Switzerland convened a Diplomatic Conference of the states parties to the Geneva Conventions to adopt a Third Additional Protocol allowing for the third neutral symbol to be used in combination with other national Red Cross Society symbols. I am so grateful to the Swiss government for initiating this effort and proud of the United States diplomats who worked tirelessly to achieve an overwhelming positive vote in favor of adopting this protocol. So I wish to extend my heartfelt congratulations to the Magen David Adom Society for its full membership in the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and my appreciation for its distinguished record of providing humanitarian assistance to all those in need of aid.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The reauthorization of one of our country's seminal laws, the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act, ensures that we continue to protect the voice of our Nation's minorities. The unprovoked attacked on March 7, 1965, by State troopers on peaceful marchers crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, en route to the State capital in Montgomery, provided a vivid demonstration of the need for Federal legislation. Despite the existence of the 15th amendment, sadly, many Southern States simply ignored the amendment by passing egregious laws such as the poll tax, literacy tests, and blatantly discriminatory redistricting. The Voting Rights Act passed due to the leadership of President Lyndon Johnson and Republicans and Democrats in Congress who overcame these efforts to deny minorities the right to vote. My wife and I had the distinct privilege of marching last year in the 40th anniversary march in Selma. It was an extraordinary experience for us and a reminder of how far our country has come in the last 40 years and how far we still have to go in our civil rights movement. The march even included many figures in the civil rights movement, including Congressman John Lewis of Georgia, who was beaten and almost left for dead when he attempted to cross the bridge leading the original Selma march. Today, the party of Abraham Lincoln has a unique opportunity to contribute to the progress that has been made in advancing civil rights and narrowing the gap in minority voting rights. Before relinquishing the floor, I want to address one controversial provision in this legislation, section 203, which provides voting assistance in other languages. While I am a strong supporter of making English our country's official language, we need to recognize that when it comes to voting, particularly for ballot initiatives, some citizens can speak English but not read it. These are American citizens who own the right to vote, but may need the assistance provided in section 203. I applaud the leadership of Chairman Sensenbrenner and Congressman Watt, and all the Members on both sides of the aisle who have brought this landmark bill to the floor and urge support of this rule. We need to defeat all amendments and pass this historic legislation.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4411, of which I am a cosponsor. This legislation would prohibit banks and credit card companies from processing payments for online bets. I believe gambling is inherently dishonest and am opposed to it in any form. During my 14 years in the State legislature I voted against every gambling bill we considered. Gambling financially cripples those who can least afford it--the poor--through the cruel and misleading lure of ``winning it big.'' I am concerned about the spread of gambling, especially among our children. We need to pause and rethink whether we truly want to legalize so many forms of gambling in so many areas of the country. In my judgment, Internet gambling should be regulated the same way as traditional forms of gambling, as was recommended by the National Gambling Impact Study Commission. Illegal acts should be prohibited wherever they occur--including cyberspace--and society clearly has the right to prevent cyberspace from being used for illegal purposes. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition of H.R. 4761, which would open the entire Outer Continental Shelf to drilling for both oil and gas. Before looking to open up more area for drilling, we need to develop a comprehensive energy policy that emphasizes conservation, as well as increasing our supply with renewable and nonrenewable energy resources. We need to increase our supply of energy, but it is imperative we first take bold action to reduce our demand for oil. This legislation takes the wrong approach to our energy policy by not challenging Americans to use energy in more responsible ways. The bottom line is we are not resolving our energy needs because we are not conserving. We'll just continue to consume more and waste more, consume more and waste more, and act like it doesn't matter. We are on a demand course that is simply unsustainable. Drilling is the wrong answer to the right question of how do we meet our energy needs? Before we increase our supply of energy, we must first take control of our over-consumption.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Inslee-Brown-Waite amendment which would fund three newly authorized programs under the Violence Against Women Act. Domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking are crimes of epidemic proportions, exacting terrible costs on individual lives and our communities. Nearly one in four U.S. women report that they have been physically assaulted by an intimate partner during their lifetimes and one in six have been the victims of attempted or completed rape. Without full funding for VAWA programs, families cannot access the services they need to escape from violence. The continued support of Congress is crucial to helping victims and their children find safety and security and build self-sufficiency.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that this weekend, June 23-25, 2006, has been designated by Best Friends Animals Society as Best Friends Kindness Weekend. The way a society treats its animals speaks to the core values and priorities of its citizens. As a co-chair of the Congressional Friends of Animals Caucus, I am committed to animal welfare because I believe animals are vital to our livelihood, and I believe humankind has an obligation to all animals. Some species have become our companions, some play important roles in sensitive ecosystems, and some are raised for food. It is our duty to protect and care for all of these animals. The Best Friends Weekend reminds all of us how animals enrich our lives through their companionship, friendship and love. This weekend of kindness activities should serve as a reminder to all of us, that in this increasing fragmented society we need to be ever more compassionate about the animals in our world, whether they are companion pets, service animals, zoo critters, livestock, or nature's wildlife. It is a reminder that the bond between humans and animals is a vital one and is capable of bringing joy and healing to people of all ages. It is also a reminder to be more kind and compassionate to our fellow man.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, on June 22, 2006, I traveled to Connecticut to deliver a high school graduation address and, therefore, missed 11 recorded votes. I take my voting responsibility very seriously. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on recorded vote No. 308, ``yes'' on recorded vote 309, ``yes'' on recorded vote 310, ``yes'' on recorded vote 311, ``yes'' on recorded vote 312, ``yes'' on recorded vote 313, ``no'' on recorded vote 314, ``yes'' on recorded vote 315, ``no'' on recorded vote 316, ``yes'' on recorded vote 317, and ``yes'' on recorded vote 318.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleague as well in thanking Mr. Davis for his comments. I am a huge fan of what I call community-based health centers. These clinics, these health centers do awesome work. So, Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 5573, the Health Centers Renewal Act, which will reauthorize the Community Health Center program for 5 more years and increase the program's funding. This continues the strong commitment Congress has shown to these centers over the past 5 years. During the last reauthorization, this administration sought to double the amount of people receiving care through community health centers from 10 million to 20 million. Already nearly 16 million individuals are now receiving quality care, and half of these individuals are uninsured. So of the 46 million uninsured, approximately 8 million are receiving excellent care from these centers. By preventing costly hospitalizations and reducing the use of emergency care for routine services, it is estimated community clinics save the health care system over $6 billion annually. So, in conclusion, I strongly support passage of this legislation so community health centers can continue providing high-quality, cost- effective care. And I thank Mr. Deal and others, including Mr. Green, for bringing this bill out. It is an important bill, and I urge its passage.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support Mr. Castle's amendment to prohibit the Department of Defense from awarding bonus fees for good performance to any defense contractor that does not meet the contract's requirements. Mr. Chairman, I'm disappointed we need to debate this subject. I'm disappointed that while our servicemen and servicewomen are in harm's way, and while the Congress and the American taxpayer are spending billions of dollars to ensure they have all the resources and equipment they need, the Defense Department is paying bonuses to companies that haven't earned them and companies are accepting bonuses that are not due to them. During consideration of the Defense Authorization Act, we wisely passed an amendment also authored by Mr. Castle that requires the Defense Department to develop and issue standards that link award and incentive fees to desired program outcomes, such as meeting cost, schedule, and capability goals. I look forward to the Department implementing these standards, but until they do we should ensure unwarranted and undeserved payments are not paid.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, on June 19, 2006, I was in Connecticut and, therefore, missed three recorded votes. I take my voting responsibility very seriously. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on recorded vote No. 289, ``yea'' on recorded vote No. 290 and ``yea'' on recorded vote No. 291.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. This is al Qaeda that is saying that; correct?

Mr. SHAYS. What is important in your dialogue is the terrorists. And there was this argument: Well, the terrorists are not in Iraq. I am not going to argue whether they were there before we went in, but no one can argue that they are not there now. In fact, the prince of the terrorists, al Zarqawi, was killed. He was killed operating and doing his handiwork in Iraq.

Mr. SHAYS. I do not know, if that is the kind dialogue that has been happened in Texas. Most of my folks have recognized that we got him and it was due to good intelligence. But if I could, you are talking about this administration. Let me just talk briefly about what a former administration said, in other words, what Bill Clinton said, according to John A. Torres from the Florida Today on June 13 in a meeting he had on the 12th. He wrote, ``Former President Bill Clinton told Florida Democrats on Monday that Iraq's fledgling government would falter if the United States were to withdraw its troops. He also said more terrorists could emerge from that region without an American military presence.'' So he is arguing that without a presence it would be worse. Then he said, and this is a quote: `` `The representative government there in Iraq is a hopeful sign,' '' Clinton said at a fundraising reception for the Florida Democratic Party at the Orlando Marriott downtown. `But we need to stay there long enough for the politics to get worked out,' he said. `If we withdrew tomorrow, that government couldn't survive.' ``Clinton said he didn't agree with the original decision to invade Iraq before finishing military operations in Afghanistan. However he said the focus now needs to be on stabilizing Iraq and he warned that occupying Iraq for too long would backfire.'' Too long it would backfire, but he is very clear: We cannot leave until we stabilize Iraq.

Mr. SHAYS. Thank you. I am almost done for this part, and I would encourage the gentleman to stand up so we could have a little bit of a dialogue about this. But when I read what he read in the resolution, declares that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq, I think it is a very clear statement. If people think it is in the national interest to have an arbitrary date, they can vote ``no'' against this resolution and hold their head up high. If like you, Mr. Gohmert, and I feel that it would be an absolute huge mistake, and, in fact, I am not aware of any war that has been won by setting arbitrary dates, then we would want this statement to stand and we would support it. This declares that the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq. I believe the war in Iraq is a noble effort. I believe this describes exactly how I feel. If there are those who feel that we should not complete the mission to create a sovereign, free, and secure and united Iraq, they have the ability with their heads held high to vote against it. I appreciate the opportunity we have had to debate these two very important points.

Mr. SHAYS. If the gentleman will allow me to comment, I think the gentleman makes a very good point. I love to just think of the Revolutionary War and, being somewhat a student of history and loving history, thinking of when my professors would tell me that one-third of the American people supported the war against Great Britain, one-third opposed it, and one-third didn't care or didn't even know there was a war. But we were pretty divided. In fact, the war during that time we had families absolutely divided. And Benjamin Franklin's son was the governor of a State, did not want to give up that authority given to him by the crown, and opposed the war. Even among their own family, there was division. But what I think about that Revolutionary War that just blows me away is George Washington had one failure after another after another. In fact, they said if the wind had been blowing the other way, he would have been captured in Manhattan. Thank goodness there was not the press that said we have made all these terrible mistakes, we need to leave. And it gets me to this point. We have made mistakes, but they do not justify leaving. What is justified is to stop making those mistakes and doing it the right way. And if the gentleman would just indulge me a little longer, I am well aware that Abraham Lincoln was constantly criticized because his generals were not winning. In fact, his generals started criticizing him. In fact, a general ran against him in his reelection because they thought he was not fighting the war properly. So thank goodness we did not set an arbitrary date on either George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. Thank goodness we did not say because you have made mistakes, we have got to just stop.

Mr. SHAYS. Will the gentleman yield on that point?

Mr. SHAYS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And just to say that I appreciate the opportunity to appear with him and to have some dialogue. Being to Iraq 12 times has been very interesting for me because what I have been able to do, I go every 3 or 4 months and I am able to kind of graph out how well we are doing or how well we are not doing and to have a sense of where we are headed. If you were to just take April 2003 when I was there, and now, in June of 2006, you would say, well, we are not, things aren't as good as they were way back in April when everyone was euphoric. And if you are tempted to draw those two points you see a downward slope. But if you were an economist or anyone else looking at a graph you would say, well, what happened in between? Is the trend line up or is it down? Well, it has clearly been up. And the reason it has been up is that we saw a serious decline in what happened in Iraq shortly after we took over. We, unfortunately, allowed for the looting. We, unfortunately, didn't take charge of the munitions depots. So Iraqis got in there and took out a lot of armaments. And then we, and I think this was the biggest mistake. We allowed their army, their border patrol and their police to be disbanded. Now, what we basically said to 26 million Iraqis is, you have no police, no border patrol and army. And then what we said to 150,000 troops, mostly Americans, is you have to be their army, their police and their border patrol. Really, an impossible task. And I say that with a lot of regret, but also with the recognition that explains why things really started to decline. And what you then saw is the fact that you saw the Iraqis have real concerns about the United States. We had said, you lay down your arms, don't fight, and we will work with you. And the Iraqis would say to me, why are you putting my brother and my father and my uncle, my cousin, my son, particularly my husband out of work? That was their argument. And they said, why can't they at least guard a hospital? Well, those were very poignant words for me because the first death we had was Wilfredo Perez from Norwalk, a young man who was guarding a hospital. We had another death Tyanna Avery Felder, this young woman from Bridgeport. And then we lost another American, Jack Dempsey, a very young man who graduated from high school and wanted to be in the Marines, and he went in the Marines instead of going on to college. These three fine Americans from my district lost their lives. I can look their families in the eye and say, without any hesitation whatsoever, that they did not die in vain. I can say that so long as we don't abandon Iraq, leave prematurely. When we dug this hole with no army, no police and border patrol, and asked our military, we saw the problems that we have seen. But then what did we do to turn this corner and head in the right direction? We started to train their police, their border patrol and their army. That is what we did. And we saw in 2005, extraordinary elections. I was there for the first election. It was one of the most thrilling things that I have ever seen in my entire life. We were in a Kurdish area, in Irbil, and we saw Iraqi women bringing their husbands and family members to vote. They were so excited that after they voted they celebrated. And I was so excited watching these brave people as they voted. And what I saw was something pretty extraordinary. What I saw were Iraqis thrilled with the opportunity to vote. And I asked if I could put my finger in that ink jar. And they looked at me and said, with some astonishment, no. You are not an Iraqi. And I thought, she could have said I wasn't a Kurd. But she said I wasn't an Iraqi. She didn't think of Sunni, Shiia and Kurd. In fact, when I go to Iraq and I will ask someone, are you a Kurd or a Shiia or a Sunni, they will say I am a Shiia, but I am married to a Sunni, or I will ask someone the same question. They will say, I am a Kurd. But sir, Kurds are Sunnis. For me, it is an amazing thing to go to that country and to see the absolute conviction that Iraqis have that they can have a better future. And I think as I am seeing this, back here at home we are saying we need to leave. Again, when I ask the Iraqis what is their biggest fear, their biggest fear is this, that you will leave us, that you will leave us before we can take hold of democracy and own it. And I know my colleague made reference to the concept of lying. There is no question in my mind that anyone lied about weapons of mass destruction, not a scintilla of doubt about that issue. And I could confirm it in a whole host of ways. One is, we didn't let our troops go into Iraq until every one of them had protective chemical gear. If we didn't think they had chemicals, if we didn't think they would use it, we sure as heck would not have spent our time doing that. What we should have made sure of was that they had body armor. So they did not have body armor. They had exactly what we thought they needed: protective gear against chemicals. When I went to the Brits, the French, the Turks, the Jordanians, and the Iraqis, they all said this to me: He has weapons of mass destruction. Only the French said he wouldn't use it.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I have been listening to this debate all day. The argument I am hearing most from the opponents of this resolution is we shouldn't have gone into Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein in spite of the fact that many of them voted to go into Iraq. I am hearing from opponents that there was and is no connection between Islamist terrorists and the war in Iraq, in spite of the fact that the prince of al Qaeda, al Zarqawi, did his gross handiwork in Iraq. Fortunately, he is dead. I am hearing from opponents of this resolution that we have made many mistakes in Iraq, as if that is justification for arguing that we need to leave. We have made a number of mistakes. We permitted the looting of government buildings. We didn't secure the munitions depot. We disbanded their army, their border patrol and police, and then asked the 150,000 coalition forces, mostly brave American soldiers, to protect and defend 26 million Iraqis living in a country the size of California. These were mistakes, but mistakes do not justify leaving prematurely. They help explain why things could be better, and why, because we learn from our mistakes, we are doing better. Since the transfer of power to Iraq in June of 2004, we have seen considerable progress, three free elections that put our elections in the United States to shame, the training of hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi security forces, the establishment of a government chosen by a national assembly comprised of 30 percent women. I am not afraid we will lose the war in Iraq. I am deeply concerned we will lose the war in Iraq here at home. Our efforts to remove Saddam Hussein from power and help bring democracy to the most troubled part of the world is truly a dear and noble effort that must succeed.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I am not afraid we will lose the war in Iraq, ... in Iraq. I am deeply concerned we will lose the war in Iraq here at home. Our efforts to remove Saddam Hussein from power and help bring democracy to the most troubled part of the world is a truly noble effort that must succeed. Whether you believe al Qaeda was in Iraq when the war began, they are there now, and they think they can win because they believe we will leave too soon, before Iraqis can defend themselves. True, we got their prince. Al Zarqawi is dead, but his fellow terrorists remain determined to succeed. This resolution clearly links the war in Iraq with the war against Islamist terrorists. Islamist terrorists is exactly who the 9/11 Commission said we are confronting. If you agree, vote for this resolution and explain why. If you disagree, vote against the resolution and explain why. I support the rule. I support the resolution. I support our efforts in Iraq, and I look forward to the 10 hours of debate. When I ask individual Iraqis what is their biggest concern, it is not the bombings, the lack of electricity or anything else other than this. It is, and I quote, ``that you will leave us. That you will leave us before we can grab hold of democracy and defend ourselves.'' I pray we will not let them down. I look forward to the 10 hours of debate. I look forward to our being absolutely resolute in helping Iraqis have an opportunity they have worked so hard to achieve. In just 11 months, Iraqis have had three elections that put our elections to shame. They have a new government. They only need more time to develop their security, to defend themselves and a democracy they dearly love.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I do not think I am going to take the full 5 minutes, but I have been in this House Chamber almost all day and I hear these arguments that we don't have a plan to end the war in Iraq and succeed, and that is just simply not true. It is not true at all. The fact is the plan was wrong in the sense that there was the anticipation that it would happen more easily. But the plan is very clear. It is not simple. It requires that the Iraqis have their own police, their own border patrol, and their own army in order to secure themselves. And since we did not allow for their police to be restood, we had to start from scratch and train them. And it is simply not possible to train a police and border patrol, an army, in 1 year or 2 or 3. There are 26 million Iraqis in a country the size of California. But every day we train more and more of them, so that now they control about 42 percent of the land that includes 42 percent of the population. So as we continue with our plan, as we continue to train more and more Iraqis, we are able to move our troops out and move their troops in. We are able to move their police in and our troops out. We are able to move their border patrol in and our troops out. Now, it is clear that they do not have the logistics, so we will still have to be there later, but not in the numbers that we have now. That is all part of the plan; to train their troops, train their border patrol, train their army, and allow them to take our place. What we object to is leaving prematurely. And if you ask an Iraqi what their biggest fear is, and having been there 12 times I have spoken to a lot of them, it is basically the same thing, it is that you will leave us; that you will leave us before we can take hold of democracy and before we can defend ourselves. That is their biggest fear. Some of them even say, like you did in Vietnam. And some of them will make reference to what they hear on CNN or what they hear about elected officials who say we need to get out, we need to have some kind of artificial timetable. Thank goodness George Washington didn't have Congress telling him he had to have a timetable to beat the Brits. Thank goodness when all the generals criticized Abraham Lincoln, we didn't say, well, the generals are against Abraham Lincoln, he doesn't have a plan, we better just fold our tent. Thank goodness that didn't happen. The bottom line for me is very clear. We may have been wrong about weapons of mass destruction, and for that the President loses credibility, and people like me do, and people on the other side of the aisle who voted for going into Iraq, and now pretend like they didn't, we all lose our credibility there. But we don't lose our credibility with this: Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. He used these weapons on his own people and neighbors. He didn't abide by the agreement that stopped us from going into Baghdad. He has now been removed. Thank God. The Iraqi people have a democracy that is flourishing and is extraordinarily impressive. Three elections have allowed the Iraqis to form a government that created a Constitution, adopt a Constitution, and then elect a government under that Constitution. All the Iraqis are asking from this Congress is you came in, you removed our security people, you have given us a taste of democracy, let us live that democracy and let us have the capability to protect ourselves before you leave. That's our plan.

Mr. SHAYS

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

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would add $750,000 to an account that has $1.5 million in it. Mrs. Maloney and I both had legislation adding $1.5 million on top of the $1.5 million to the Civil Liberties Board. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that the chairman will accept this amendment at 750, and I advise Mrs. Maloney of that fact. What we want to do, Mr. Chairman, is to support a Civil Liberties Board that hopefully over time will do more than it is presently doing. When we give the executive branch more power, we need to have more oversight, more congressional oversight, stronger whistleblower protection. And the 9/11 Commission suggested a strong Civil Liberties Board. I would like to ask the chairman if this is in fact an amendment that he would accept.

Mr. SHAYS

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, on June 12, 2006, I was speaking to a group of professionals in New York City about my work in Congress and, therefore, missed five recorded votes. I take my voting responsibility very seriously, and had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on recorded vote No. 251, ``yes'' on recorded vote 252, ``yes'' on recorded vote 253, ``yes'' on recorded vote 254, and ``yes'' on recorded vote 255.