Ed Schrock

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to encourage my colleagues to join me in honoring the Navy League of the United States for its 100 years of service to service members, their families and their communities. I recently introduced House Resolution 416 to congratulate the Navy League on its 100th anniversary, its 100th year of service to America. The Navy League of the United States was founded in 1902 with the encouragement of then-President Theodore Roosevelt. The Navy League is unique among military-oriented associations. It is a civilian organization dedicated to the education of our citizens and the support of the men and women of the sea services and their families, including the adoption of ships, installations, and units; commissioning ceremonies; award programs; and other recognition programs. The Navy League works closely with the Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and U.S.-flag Merchant Marines through a network of nearly 78,000 active members and over 330 councils in the United States and around the world. The Navy League is widely respected by citizens, community and industry leaders, and public officials. Navy League programs are welcomed in communities throughout the Nation, and members are recognized for their integrity and patriotism. For instance, just this morning I met with the leaders of the Navy League in the Second Congressional District of Virginia, which I represent, on plans they have for the commissioning ceremonies of the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan in May of next year. They are expecting over 35,000 people to attend the event. The members of the Hampton Roads Navy League will handle all the events surrounding this monumental ceremony. This is just one example of the kind of support they provide to America's sea services around the world. As a retired Navy captain, it is a privilege for me to bring this resolution to the House floor and recognize the Navy League and the outstanding role that it plays to members of our sea services. I ask Members to join me in thanking the Navy League of the United States for its long-standing service. I encourage all Members to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. J. Res. 95, the joint resolution under consideration.

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh).

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution sponsored by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham). As we continue our struggle against terrorism, my thoughts, and I am certain the thoughts of many Americans, turn to the military men and women on the front lines. Their commitment and courage never fail to inspire me and lift my spirits. America is justifiably proud of the wonderful people serving our Nation in uniform. Among the brave soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen who have served over our Nation's history, there is a special group of heroes who have through their selfless deeds and sacrifices demonstrated the highest level of gallantry. I am referring to those members who have been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Mr. Speaker, the standards for award of the Medal of Honor leave little doubt about the remarkable nature of the heroic acts involved. The heroic deed of the person must be proven by incontestable evidence to be so outstanding as to clearly distinguish it as being beyond the call of duty. The heroism must involve the risk of the person's life, and it must be of the type of deed that, if the person had not done it, would not subject the person to any justified criticism. Only one has to read the citations that accompany the medals to appreciate the incredible devotion to comrades and country that is indicative of each recipient. This resolution would provide an additional honor to every recipient of the Medal of Honor by creating a Medal of Honor flag to be presented to the recipients. The Medal of Honor flag will also be a symbol to all who see it of the great strength and courage that resides within the American spirit. Mr. Speaker, today as our Nation faces many difficult days ahead, we need this type of symbol to remind us that even ordinary people are capable of great deeds when freedom is threatened. For these reasons, I am proud to join the gentleman from Iowa in this resolution and urge my colleagues to support its adoption.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 176 I voted and checked my vote, but apparently the computer didn't register my vote. I would like the Record to reflect I intended to vote, ``yea.''

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, before 1996, it was evident to most Americans that the welfare system was out of control and needed immediate and meaningful reform. So in 1996, the Republican-led Congress had the courage to reform welfare, making work the centerpiece for the new law, providing a hand-up, not a handout. Since then, millions of Americans have left the welfare rolls, child poverty rolls have dropped, and the poverty rate among African Americans is at a new all-time record. Welfare reform has required millions of poor Americans to obtain employment, leading them from dependency on the government to personal independence and from low self-esteem to self-respect and self- confidence as they lifted themselves out of poverty. Mr. Speaker, now this Congress is tasked with the reauthorization of the Welfare Reform Act. We must continue our progress by strengthening the path towards independence through work. Welfare reform has given millions of Americans a second chance at the American dream, and they are achieving it. Let us not turn back the clock on these wonderful achievements. Let us stay the course, ensuring life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all Americans.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the state of Israel and this rule. We must continue to support Israel in its fight against terrorism. The citizens of Israel suffer undeserved death as suicide bombers terrorize Israeli cities almost daily. These bombers are not trying to achieve peace. They are trying to inflict mass murder throughout the country. Mr. Speaker, I have been to Israel. I have seen firsthand the fear Israelis must live with on a daily basis. Not knowing whether they or their family will survive each day is absolutely unacceptable. Israelis have the right to defend their country from these terrorist attacks. Having visited Afghanistan during the last recess, I have witnessed the devastation decades of war produce. If we do not stand next to Israel with our full support, the most stable and successful democracy in the Middle East may well fall to ruins like the dusty towns of Afghanistan. I will not let that happen to Israel. I support Israel, will continue to support Israel and urge my colleagues to do the same by voting yes on this resolution.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to honor Rabbi Israel Zoberman, spiritual leader of Congregation Beth Chaverim in Virginia Beach. He is also the President of the Hampton Roads Board of Rabbis, and Chairman of the Community Relations Council of the United Jewish Federation of Tidewater. I would like to share the following article that was written by Rabbi Zoberman and appeared in the Virginian-Pilot on April 12, 2002. An Open Letter to Chairman Arafat on the Occasion of Israel's 54th Anniversary Your present living accommodations are a far cry from a past of world capitals hopping. However, you are reliving the ``glorious'' 1982 days in Lebanon under siege by the same Sharon encircling you again. In truth, you are both caged in as long as there is no peace for your respective peoples. You itched to duel again (for the last time?) with your old nemesis, otherwise how explain the Second Intifada following Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount. You trapped each other; he aroused you enough for a pretext of rash action, yet you catapulted him to become a Prime Minister! Soon you may have the time to check out for yourself the over 800 references to Jerusalem in the Hebrew Bible, but why doesn't your Koran mention it even once? I wanted to believe that you transformed yourself from the terrorist you were--a freedom fighter to you--to a statesman representing a long-enduring people abused as a pawn by its Arab brethren. Your partner to the sacred opportunity and responsibility was an Israel weary of wars imposed upon it, yearning for normalcy and that elusive peace it has sought all along. When entering into official peace with Egypt, entailing painful compromises, it was Sharon as Defense Minister who dismantled the Israeli town of Yaniit. I resisted those doubtful of your famous handshake's sincerity with martyred Rabin--it cost him his life--when signing the 1993 Oslo Accords on that beautiful day at the White House, facing a breathless world celebrating a hopeful beginning. Remember the reward of a Nobel Peace Prize? How have you fallen, Ya Raees . Of course, the murder of your friend Rabin by a Jewish zealot profoundly affected you for you were justly proud of ``the peace of the brave'' with your ``brother'' Rabin. Then came vicious terrorist attacks on Israelis by Muslin extremists who opposed your peace, and Israel's political power in the only Middle East democracy shifted to the Right. Netanyahu, the victor with an American accent, claimed you were not sincere (were you?) and that Israel risked too much. He lost the confidence of the Israeli voter in the absence of peace progress, facilitating the Left's comeback with Barak at the helm. Barak miscalculated, focusing on the Syrian track and neglected to develop the same bond you enjoyed with his mentor Rabin. I empathized with your changed status, but as a leader you should have stuck to your people's welfare. Finally when Barak took a visionary and valiant step beyond Israeli premiers before him, with President Clinton's enormous input and personal stake, you simply walked away from the deal of your life. Abandoning your cause of peace, you inexplicably chose the path of violence of your own Arab enemies. Didn't you realize that indiscriminate suicide bombings with no moral inhibitions, wreaking havoc on Israeli civilians could not indefinitely be tolerated? Did you try to trigger Sharon into a harsh response, gaining from it? Well, he held back, though no nation would have delayed a far more severe answer, particularly an Arab state unencumbered by that democratic stuff and the Judeo-Christian all-consuming regard for a single human life. Why not allow your youth to grow up as God intended them instead of sacrificing your people's future on the revived pagan altars of demonic hate. When Israeli families sat down for a Passover Seder (ironically it's about freedom and standing up to terrorism) at that doomed hotel in Netanya, you greeted them with a massacre. That proved the turning point and you really cannot blame Sharon, you gave him no choice. Oh yes, an event called September 11 shook great America and President Bush declared a global war on terrorism. Did the Palestinians have to cheer when we were so diabolically attacked as they also did during the 1991 Gulf War in support of Saddam Hussein who underwrites your suicide bombers, always backing evil-doers and losers? Though fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were Arabs, you failed to halt that ship of arms from Iran, and carelessly leaving your signature on incriminating terrorist documents. It is clearer now that the line of American defense and civilization's survival run in Israel, and the unimaginable demise of that small but determined democracy would signal America's fall and both linked propositions are preposterous. Perceived weakness invites the bullies' aggression. The world is yet to accept an Israel that is not the traditional Jewish victim, with Israel bashing the new anti-Semitism. The shameful specter of burning synagogues has returned to a hypocritical Europe. Lastly, before Israel celebrates at this season its hard- won independence after two millennia of powerlessness and persecution, it pauses to recall a Holocaust you seem to care little about and I cannot forget for I am son of survivors. That monumental tragedy gave the final push for Israel's rebirth, etching forever upon Jewish consciousness the call, ``Never Again''. Do you see why doves like me feel betrayed by the ``new Arafat'', concerned about creating a hostile twenty-third Arab state so close to the only Jewish state? There is one word we Jews have never dared erase even in our darkest hours and we had many of them, for it is our ultimate weapon. Guess, Arafat, it is ``Shalom''.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to join my colleagues this evening in calling for the support of Congress to set in concrete the repeal of the marriage tax penalty. I was honored last year to become president of the Republican freshman class of the 107th Congress. Early last year, our class members came together and made the repeal of the marriage tax penalty our class priority. Fresh from the campaign trial and living in and working in our districts, each of our class members came to Washington with the understanding that one of the major priorities of the American people was to bring an end to this anti-family, anti-marriage tax. On our third day on the job, our class joined with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) to announce our commitment to the repeal of the marriage tax penalty. We championed this noble cause and were successful in obtaining the eventual repeal of the marriage tax penalty. Unfortunately, due to Senate rules, the marriage tax penalty repeal legislation included a sunset provision that would automatically reinstate the marriage tax penalty in the year 2011. What does that say to the American people about this Congress? Marriage is the bedrock of our society. It is an institution that is to be honored and respected, and it is a bond that should not be put asunder, especially by the tax policies of the Federal Government. Yet until last year, our tax laws gave married couples a $1,400 surprise on their tax bill. They saw their taxes go up for no other reason than they said ``I do,'' and the effect of this tax mostly penalized young couples trying to get their feet on the ground and retired couples just trying to keep their feet on the ground. In the second congressional district of Virginia, which I represent, there are over 56,000 married couples which were subject to the marriage tax penalty. However, if these couples decided to live together, rather than get married, they would not have to pay the tax. That is simply unfair. The repeal of the marriage tax penalty provides a new level of fairness by preventing the Federal Government from penalizing couples for being married. Now these families are able to keep $1,400 a year of their hard earned income if they can save for a down payment on a house or a new car, obtain health insurance, pay off student loans, save for their children's education or to pay off debts. The repeal of the marriage tax penalty passed last year is now helping families all across our Nation to better plan for their future. If they are able to eliminate debt, save for retirement or pay cash for large ticket items, their future discretionary income will grow, helping to also grow our economy. Between now and 2011, it is certain that many of these couples' income will increase from raises or from taking new jobs. Also, they will be able to better handle their day-to-day expenses and any emergencies that may come along, but in 2011, that comfort level provided by tax relief is set to disappear for these families. On that day, the penalty for being married will surprise them once again. I cannot stand by and allow that to happen to the 56,000 families that I represent. Unfortunately, there are those in this body and the other body that do not support making the repeal of the marriage tax penalty permanent. They will argue that we must work to ensure that Social Security is intact for future and present retirees. I could not agree more. Social Security is important for all Americans, and we should make sure that it stays protected for all Americans. However, I believe we can save Social Security and provide meaningful tax reform at the same time. If we restrain the growth of government and the growth of discretionary spending, we can achieve both, and the economic benefits from tax relief will help generate greater revenues as our economy continues to pull out of the now ended recession. Therefore, the repeal of the marriage tax penalty should be made permanent this year. Let us show the American people that this Congress is determined to support legislation that helps strengthen families and thus our communities and economy. When the tax permanency legislation comes to the House floor, I hope that we will send a strong message in support of American families by voting in favor of repealing this marriage tax penalty once and for all.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge my colleagues to defeat the Waxman amendment. I agree it is well-intentioned, but the issues it attempts to address are already addressed in the legislation. If this amendment is successful, it will cripple the legislation, and make it impossible to fulfill its purpose. The legislation in its current form has strong protections to prevent the release of proprietary information and harsh penalties for anyone who releases this information. The high-tech community would have spoken out if they felt these requirements were not sufficient, but they support the legislation in its current form. To prevent detailees from having access to private sector information would prevent them from working on most government IT projects. This would turn a program that is valuable for the government, private sector, and the employees into a program that does little to foster any development among high-tech IT professionals. Mr. Chairman, this amendment creates an illusion that government employees are in control of thousands of private industry trade secrets just awaiting theft by a corporate crook. The fact is that trade secrets are no longer secrets if they are disclosed to the government. The Waxman amendment would destroy this legislation, rendering it into a program that does little to train government employees or private sector IT managers. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to defeat the Waxman amendment.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Freedom to Telecommute Act of 2002. For many years, the government contracting industry has been forced to lag behind because many government agencies prohibit their contractors from allowing telecommuting. This legislation will help them move into the 21st century. Many of the country's most technologically advanced companies have embraced telecommuting as a cost-savings measure that is good for companies, good for employees and good for families. For far too long the demands of the job have conflicted with the demands of the family, and workers have had to choose between the two. For many workers, a 9 to 5 workday is not feasible. Rather than neglecting their duties at home in order to work, telecommuting allows them to supplement their traditional workday or to occasionally work from home. Some businesses have also found it advantageous to offer telecommuting as an alternative to the traditional office environment. This practice saves money, and when the government is the customer, the savings can be passed along to the American taxpayer. This legislation permits government contractors to take advantage of telecommuting opportunities. We will all benefit from this change to procurement policies. Government contracts will be completed faster and more efficiently, saving us all money and taxes. The deterrents to working more than the normal workday will be removed if employees can work from home and contractors will invest money in their product rather than costly overhead. The increased number of telecommuters will also take people off the roads during heavy commuting hours, reducing congestion and helping our environment. The most important change that will result from this legislation is the benefits that will result for the employees of government contractors. They will be able to spend more time with their family, while still meeting their work commitments. Moms and dads will be able to stay at home with a sick child and still be able to work. Moms and dads can take their kids to soccer practice and return to work when they get home. The district I represent in Norfolk and Virginia Beach has hundreds of companies who contract with the Defense Department. By allowing their employees to telecommute, many of these contractors will save money and give the government the ability to spend money on our Nation's national security priorities rather than more costly government contracts. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is pro-taxpayer, pro-business and pro- family. I thank my good friend the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement Policy, for submitting this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, and I thank the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Nussle) for this outstanding budget. As we can see from the chart, this budget keeps the promises made to our military families. For so many years, promises have been made and remain unfulfilled, but the buck stops here. We are funding a military pay raise. Our men and women in uniform are grossly underpaid for the services they provide to this country. We have a 4.1 percent pay increase in this budget. We are delivering on our promise to improve living standards by increasing pay. In addition, we are improving the living standards for our military families by funding over $4 billion for improving current military family housing, as well as for building brand new housing. It is unacceptable that we require military families to live in substandard housing facilities. We must support military families by supporting the budget. Finally, we are fulfilling the century-old promise of funding concurrent receipt for our disabled retired veterans. As a retired Naval officer, I believe the delivery of this promise is long overdue. This budget funds concurrent receipt for our veterans, those who need it most. It will send home a real check with real financial benefits. This year we are providing over $500 million for this program and 5.8 billion over the next 5 years. Our retired veterans desperately need our help. They dedicated their lives to the defense of our country, and it is time we show them how much we appreciate that. This is a solid budget. It funds programs to improve the quality of life for our military families, and it keeps the promises to our veterans that were made long ago. I encourage my colleagues to support this budget. It is unacceptable for individuals to attack this budget when they do not offer a plan of their own.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his leadership and the leadership of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) as well. As a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I frequently discuss the importance of redundancy in our information infrastructure. Redundancy is essential to a strong national defense. Because if our information only has one path to travel, times of emergency can make it difficult for information to travel at all. Redundancy in our system is essential to ensuring confidence in our information infrastructure during times of emergency and to plan for information technology growth in the future. Tauzin-Dingell will use both the carrot and the stick in encouraging telephone companies to expand our high-speed data transmission infrastructure, thus making our country less vulnerable to a communications shutdown in times of emergency. When there are two high-speed networks capable of handling the broadband needs of the country, both cable and telephone, one could be pressed into service if the other is disabled. The bill we vote on today requires the phone companies to equip all their local offices with high-speed data transmission within 5 years. Without this legislation, neither the incentive nor the requirement will be there for the Bell companies to expand their networks. Nineteen percent of our country has no high-speed data service at all, and 48 percent have only one network in place. That leaves two- thirds of the country without a redundant high-speed data network. Mr. Chairman, this leaves our country vulnerable and exposed to an information shutdown during a national crisis. Tauzin-Dingell will not cost taxpayers one penny but will create over a million new jobs, give millions of Americans access to high-speed Internet and, most importantly, will strengthen America's information infrastructure. Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today in support of H.R. 1748, which will honor our good friend, Congressman Tom Bliley. For over thirty years, Tom served the people of Richmond and the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia. As a Vice Mayor and Mayor of Richmond and as the Congressman representing Virginia's Third and Seventh Districts, Tom worked to bring opposing sides together on issues of contention. As Chairman of the House Committee on Commerce, Chairman Bliley brought together lawmakers with very differing views to find consensus on some of the most important laws regulating telecommunications, capital markets, energy, and healthcare. At the same time, Tom stuck to his guns and remained a staunch conservative. Tom took the helm of the Commerce Committee when we were beginning to see the first stages of the Information Age in the late 1990s. In the six years that he was chairman, the Internet grew exponentially and the telecommunications industry made many important developments. Chairman Bliley avoided knee-jerk reactions to regulate these growing industries, allowing them to grow and flourish. In addition to serving as a powerful committee chairman, Tom was an ardent advocate for his constituents, making no apologies for working to gain federal support for important projects in his district. From the floodwall along the James River in Richmond to renovation of Main Street Station, Tom looked after his district very closely. Perhaps Tom's most valuable achievements in Congress were in the area of adoption advocacy and legislation. The adoption tax credit legislation that he shepherded became known as the Tom Bliley Adoption Tax Credit and I am pleased that Congress was able to include expansion of the tax credit in the tax relief legislation passed last year. Though he has retired from Congress, Tom has not ended his service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. He now sits on the Board of Visitors for the University of Virginia and Affiliated Schools, working to improve higher education quality and expand educational opportunities in Virginia. I am pleased to be a co-sponsor of H.R. 1748, which will recognize Chairman Bliley for his service to Virginia and his country. His record of distinguished service demonstrates to us all his commitment to the values and principles of freedom and public service. The Tom Bliley Post Office Building will be a testament to his service and dedication, and I urge passage of this legislation.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 279) recognizing the service of the crew members of the USS Enterprise Battle Group during its extended deployment for the war effort in Afghanistan, as amended.

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 279.

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank very much the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey); the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump); the ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton); and Members of the House leadership for allowing me to bring this resolution to the House floor today. On November 10, the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise and her battle group returned to Norfolk, Virginia, after an extended deployment that included participation in the war on global terrorism in Afghanistan. On September 11, while America was under attack, the USS Enterprise and her battle group had just begun their journey home from a routine deployment in the Persian Gulf in support of Operation Southern Watch over Iraq. Within 30 minutes after the first attack on New York City, the commanding officer of the Enterprise made a 180-degree turn, headed back towards the Middle East, and waited for orders from the National Command Authority here in Washington. The captain and his crew and accompanying ships were eager and ready to defend America against attack. Mr. Speaker, I was privileged to serve in the United States Navy for 24 years. I am privileged today to represent the Second Congressional District of Virginia, home to the USS Enterprise Battle Group, a battle group that consists of 14,500 military personnel, 13 ships, and 8 squadrons of helos and airplanes. The crew of this ship and her battle group were prepared to defend America every day of the year. September 11 was no exception. The first attacks on Afghanistan came from the USS Enterprise Battle Group. Our men and women wear the uniform of their Nation with more pride than any other Nation in the world. I worked closely with the Committee on Armed Services to expand this resolution to thank all services fighting in the war against terrorism. The combined efforts of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and the Coast Guardsmen will win that war for America and rid this world of terrorism forever. Mr. Speaker, let me say it once again: our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marine Corps and Coast Guardsmen are the best in the world. The purpose of this resolution is to commend the USS Enterprise Battle Group and thank them for extending their deployment and for being the first ones to enter the battle against terrorism. To all the soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen on active duty and in the reserves fighting this battle today, I thank you for your commitment, your bravery, and for volunteering to defend our great country. Mr. Speaker, I think I can speak for all of my colleagues when I say ``thank you'' to the men and women in the Armed Forces, who served with honor, respect and bravery. They are true American heroes. God bless them, God bless their families, and God bless America. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez) for assisting with this, and my good friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott). These young men and women deserve all the praise we can heap on them, and I think when we do that from the floor of the House, it adds a little more oomph to what we are doing.

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I come to the floor this evening with a plea for the people of the district I represent. When the House votes Thursday to grant the President Trade Promotion Authority, I urge my colleagues to support this important measure. The district I represent sits on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. Millions of dollars' worth of goods pass through these waters every day, both from domestic sources and from our trading partners abroad. The Commonwealth of Virginia is home to four State-owned ports, the Newport News Marine Terminal, the Norfolk International Terminals, the Portsmouth Marine Terminal and the Virginia Inland Port in Warren County, Virginia. At these ports, importers and exporters find an intricate transportation network, bringing maritime commerce together with road and rail transport. This network allows the goods brought into the ports to reach two-thirds of the American population within 24 hours. If a country or foreign company wants to do business with Americans, they will no doubt deal with the ports of Virginia at some point. For this reason, the upcoming vote on Presidential Trade Promotion Authority is vital to the people of Virginia's Second District and for all Americans. On Thursday, we will consider granting the President Trade Promotion Authority to negotiate new trade agreements with foreign nations. It is the first step in gaining access to foreign markets for our economy and to open doors to other countries for similar access. This measure has a great impact on the residents of the district I represent because we live where the effects of trade are most evident. When trade increases, more ships and barges come into these ports, packed with containers and creating the need for more people to handle these goods and ensure their safe transport to communities across the country. Equally important is the impact that the trade has on the rest of the country. Increasing trade by removing trade and investment barriers benefits all Americans in the checkout line, giving them a wider choice of goods at better prices. Thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs depend on exports, and TPA will open more foreign markets for these products, and American farmers will benefit as more markets open for their goods. When the lack of free trade agreements makes our wages lower and makes goods cost more, this is a tax. The fact that America is party to only a few trade agreements amounts to an invisible tax on the American people and holds back American prosperity. American exports are burdened by harsh tariffs, making those goods less competitive in foreign markets and hindering the success of American companies. Similarly, the lack of imports gives Americans access to fewer competitive choices, forcing them to pay higher prices at the checkout register. The free trade agreements that America has entered into have been shown to benefit the economy and workers. Exports to Canada and Mexico have more than doubled since NAFTA was enacted in 1974. Higher exports translate directly into more business for American companies and more jobs for American workers. The last time trade promotion authority for America was in place was in 1994. Since that time, the United States has not enacted a single free trade agreement with any Nation. This sends a signal to our potential trading partners that when TPA is not in effect, America is either not able to negotiate effective agreements or simply is not willing. But we can send an equally strong signal to our potential trading partners on Thursday by telling them that we are ready to broker trade deals and we have the tools to do so efficiently. This vote will help us reaffirm America's role as the leader in international trade in order to bring better jobs and more business to America. Naysayers will argue that Trade Promotion Authority should not be granted until it is guaranteed that we will impose labor and environmental standards on the countries with which we deal. We must remind ourselves that these agreements are with nations as sovereign as our own. We would disapprove of a country who required our Nation's factories to meet environmental standards or pay employees particular wages. Environmental and labor concerns are certainly causes worthy of our efforts, but attaching unnecessarily strict regulations to trade agreements only breaks down agreements and blocks access for American companies and consumers. Experience has proven that free and fair trade gives way to higher environmental and labor standards abroad. As foreign economics grows as a result of trade liberalization, governments have a greater desire and greater means to enforce labor laws and environmental protection initiatives from within. Perhaps the most important result of Trade Promotion Authority is that America will be able to increase its most valuable export, the ideals of freedom and democracy. Free and open trade allows other countries to see the benefits of capitalism and democracy. As President Bush has said, ``Economic freedom creates habits of liberty. And habits of liberty create expectations of democracy.'' Our vote on Thursday will send a message to our potential trading partners. I hope we do not send the message that Congress does not stand behind our President and that Congress wants to build up barriers to free trade. Rather, I hope that we can pass Trade Promotion Authority and send the message that America stands united, ready to do business, and ready to trade. Our economy is now at a crossroads. We can take the road that leads to increased isolationism and give up hope of creating new global trade alliances, or we can choose to take the road that leads to increased trade, better American jobs, and a better standard of living for America and our trading partners. I hope my colleagues will join me in ensuring that we travel down the path that leads to more opportunities and economic freedom for all of our citizens by supporting Presidential Trade Promotion Authority.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and it is my pleasure to rise today in support of H.R. 2910, being brought to us by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes), which will honor our good friend Congressman Norm Sisisky. The location of the post office in Petersburg, Virginia, bearing Norm's name is quite fitting. Norm represented the people of Petersburg for almost 28 years, as a member of the Virginia General Assembly for 10 years, and as a member of this body representing Virginia's Fourth Congressional District from 1983 until earlier this year. Congressman Sisisky served America in World War II and brought this experience to Congress. Norm became a senior member of the House Committee on Armed Services where he became a champion of our military and veterans issues. Norm was the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Military Procurement and also served on the Morale, Welfare and Recreation Panel. He took the lead in protecting Virginia's naval and military facilities and was an ardent defender of our national defense, but worked at the same time to ensure that military spending decisions strike the proper balance between strategic necessity and fiscal prudence. His record of distinguished service to our country and to the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia demonstrates to us all his commitment to the values and principles of freedom and public service. This facility we are naming today will remind us of his dedication to our country and to the Commonwealth of Virginia, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. SCHROCK

Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, today I was in my district attending the memorial service for the victims of the USS Cole, which was attacked by terrorists on October 12, 2000. As a result, I missed rollcall vote 382. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on this rollcall vote.