Rob Simmons

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last work for purposes of engaging in a colloquy with the distinguished gentleman of the subcommittee. On May 11, the House passed the defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2007. As the chairman knows, the bill includes a funding authorization to build two Virginia Class submarines per year, starting in 2009. Consistent with the Navy's stated requirement, the House bill also includes language requiring the service to maintain a submarine fleet of no less than 48 attack submarines. Mr. Chairman, it is clear that the Navy has a growing shortage of fast attack submarines, and I offer for consideration the following statistics provided by the Navy: over the last 5 years, the Navy submarine force last fulfilled only 60 percent of the mission taskings; in 2006, the submarine force covered only 54 percent of the combatant commanders' requests; and most alarmingly, this year the force has met only 34 percent of high-priority missions. I congratulate this distinguished chairman for his hard work on the defense appropriations bill under consideration today. The bill does not include submarine provisions similar to those found in the authorization bill, however; and so I ask the chairman to work toward a conference solution that includes funding for the advanced procurement of a second Virginia Class submarine sometime before 2012. Increasing our submarine build rate is the only solution to a growing force level gap.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in qualified support of the resolution. There is much in the resolution to like. It honors those Americans who fought in the global war on terror, and especially those who have been wounded and died; and it expresses a commitment to a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq. And it urges we protect freedom. But the resolution fails to address a key question that most Americans are asking: When are the troops coming home? Let me be clear, I have long opposed setting a date certain for immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces because such plans encourage our enemies and put our troops at risk. However, speaking as a Vietnam veteran, I believe every unconventional conflict has a tipping point where the presence of foreign soldiers on sovereign soil begins to become counterproductive, and I learned that we cannot secure a foreign land all by ourselves. We must plan a transfer of authority where a sovereign state assumes the solemn task of securing their own people within their own borders. And I believe this tipping point is fast approaching. We must patiently but firmly insist that the new Iraqi Government assume these responsibilities, and we must also be systematic in bringing home those American soldiers who have so bravely served us on the ground in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, I observe in this great Chamber two portraits: one of George Washington, a revolutionary leader; the other is France's General Lafayette who helped us with our revolution from 1777 to 1781. It is instructive to note that General Lafayette did not stay here forever, nor did we want him to go. Good friends know when to come; good friends know when to go. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it is important to be resolute about our support for the troops. But it is also time to send a clear message that our commitment is conditional on their successes, and our days in their country are not indefinite. Mr. Speaker, I rise in qualified support of the Resolution. There is much in this resolution to like. After all, it honors those Americans who have fought in the Global War on Terror, and especially those who have been wounded or died. It expresses a commitment to a ``sovereign, free, secure and united Iraq.'' And it urges that we ``protect freedom.'' But this resolution fails to fully address a key question that most Americans are asking: ``When are the troops coming home?'' Now let me be clear--I have long opposed setting a ``date certain'' for ``immediate withdrawal'' of U.S. forces because such plans encourage our enemies and put our troops at risk. However, speaking as a Vietnam Veteran, I believe that every unconventional conflict has a ``tipping point'' where the presence of foreign soldiers on sovereign soil begins to become counter-productive. I learned that we cannot secure a foreign land all by ourselves. We must plan a transfer of authority where a sovereign state assumes the solemn task of securing their own people within their own borders. I believe that this ``tipping point'' is fast approaching in Iraq. We must patiently, but firmly, insist that the new Iraqi Government assume these responsibilities. We must also be systematic in bringing home those American soldiers who have so bravely served us on the ground in Iraq. President Bush and this Congress must clearly tell our partners in Iraq--particularly, the new government--that they must step up to the plate and assume their solemn responsibilities for securing their country. The new Iraqi Government must understand that the American people will not allow their own sons and daughters to stay indefinitely; and that it's time for the Iraqis to assume more of the burden of sacrifice that any war and any revolution might bring. It is time for Iraq to come together and show the American people that it is ready to defend itself, govern itself and sustain itself. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I observe in this great chamber two large portraits. One is of George Washington, our revolutionary leader. The other is of France's General Lafayette, who helped us with our revolution from 1777 to 1781. It is instructive to note, that General Lafayette did not stay here forever; nor did we want him to. Good friends know when to come--and when to go. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it is important to be resolute about our support for our troops and their important mission. But it is also time to send a clear message to our friends in Iraq, that our commitment is conditional on their own successes, and that our days in their country are not indefinite. And although I wish this resolution could have made this point more clearly, I will support the resolution.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of important taxpayer-protection provisions that are included in this legislation. Mr. Chairman, in recent years the IRS has attempted to implement a new program under which it would contract with private companies to collect the taxes of thousands of Americans. In recognition of the inherent risks of such a plan, this legislation wisely prohibits the IRS from using fiscal year 2007 funds provided by this bill to implement or administer a private tax collection contracting program. All of us want a system that efficiently collects federal taxes, but we cannot do it at the expense of taxpayers' rights or privacy. However, if the IRS were allowed to go forward with its plan to outsource its tax collection duties, millions of taxpayer files would be made available to private debt collection companies who would ``contact'' taxpayers and collect up to a 24 percent fee from such collections. This type of incentive system on the part of the collectors would be ripe for abuse and harassment. It is why the IRS specifically prohibits its employees from being assigned quotas with regard to collection activities. It should come as no surprise that the private debt collection industry receives the greatest number of formal complaints as recorded by the Federal Trade Commission than any other business in the nation. Past experience should also guide us in consideration of this initiative. In 1996, Congress approved a two year pilot program for just such a collection scheme. Not only were there multiple violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by the private collection companies, but sensitive taxpayer data was not properly protected.After 12 months, the pilot program had cost the U.S. Treasury $17 million and Congress saw fit to cancel the remaining 12 month pilot. Each year millions of Americans voluntarily disclose personal, sensitive information to the IRS with the expectation that it will be handled with the utmost discretion and protected from erroneous or deliberate disclosure outside of the IRS. Yet the IRS is now leading the effort to disclose this information to third party contractors who have demonstrated previously that they cannot adequately protect taxpayer information. If the above facts do not cause you concern, imagine the response of your constituents when they learn that these contractors are not required to be American-based or staffed. In fact, foreign companies employing non-US. citizens can bid for this work. When American taxpayers understand that their personal information could potentially be put in the hands of foreign workers toiling in ``boiler room'' operations in foreign countries, they will rightly ask who supported such a risky and short-sighted scheme. I can assure my colleagues that you will encounter some mighty unhappy constituents if they find their personal tax information in the hands of a third party overseas. Keep in mind, also, that the most susceptible individuals will be our home-bound seniors and busy single mothers who may have overlooked some aspect of their tax filing. Do we really want to sic commission-hungry tax collection agents on these individuals? Speaking as a veteran, I recently learned that my personal data had been compromised through a theft. I do not want my personal tax data may end up in unknown hands in unknown places. This bill protects my data. American citizens deserve to have their taxes collected by American public officials at the Treasury Department. I am glad that this legislation takes steps to ensure this will be the case.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Old Saybrook, Connecticut Republican Women's Club in celebration of their 50th anniversary this month. The Old Saybrook Republican Women's Club's primary function has always been to support local and State Republican candidates and they have the distinction of being the oldest continuous Republican Women's Club in Connecticut. But while their energy and enthusiasm for Republican candidates is as welcome as it has been effective, there is far more to the group than a political agenda. For example, in conjunction with the Town Committee, the Club participates in the Washington Intern Program by sponsoring high school students and the group also gives awards to high school honor students. Clearly, the members of the organization are dedicated to helping engage young people intellectually and in matters of civic activism. Surely, part of our job as public servants should be to encourage young people to become involved in the political process. Mr. Speaker, our communities do not operate by means of government alone. The Old Saybrook Republican Women's Club exemplifies a group of ``citizens in action''. Our quality of life is greatly influenced by individuals who join hands to set and accomplish goals that make our communities better places in which to live, work and raise a family. For half a century the members of the Old Saybrook Republican Women's Club have dedicated themselves to both party and public service. I congratulate them on their dedication and commitment to the Grand Old Party and to their community.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a son of Connecticut's Second District, the district I am privileged to represent in this House. The Bingham family has lived in Salem Connecticut for many generations. I have always been impressed with the Bingham family's history of dedication to public service. Hiram Bingham IV is a prime example of this dedication--only exemplified by the fact that few people actually knew the extent of his good work, including his own family. In 1988, Hiram passed away. A few years after his death, one of his sons discovered a bundle of documents tucked away in the attic at the family home containing records from Hiram's work at the U.S. State Department. These records revealed an untold story of Hiram's courage and heroism. Hiram's family and friends knew he worked for the State Department, but he rarely mentioned the details of his employment. From 1939 to 1941, Hiram Bingham served as our Nation's vice consul in Marseilles, France. The records in the closet revealed that while serving at his post Hiram helped save at least 2,500 people from the Nazis, including the artist, Marc Chagall and Nobel Prize winning biochemist Otto Meyerhoff. During these years, this courageous individual issued papers that gave safe passage to Jewish and non-Jewish refugees. He also personally escorted dozens of people across the border into Spain. It is of no small interest that this man of principle acted in direct opposition to official State Department orders that inhibited immigration of refugees to the United States. Hiram Bingham's action defied the Nazi war machine, Vichy France and his own Nation's State Department. Ignoring the consequences of being caught, he went about his work, quietly saving as many people as he could. When his superiors discovered his activities in the spring of 1941, he was removed from his post and transferred to Buenos Aires. In 1946, he resigned because of the government's failure to pursue the Nazi presence in Latin America. After learning of his father's extraordinary efforts, his son Robert Kim Bingham, began petitioning the U.S. Postal Service in 1998 to issue a stamp in honor of his father. During that time, I was serving in the Connecticut General Assembly and Robert asked me to send a letter of support for the stamp to the Post Master General. I took the letter down to the floor during our final week of session and as we worked late into the evening every member of the General Assembly signed onto that letter--representing the first time in memory that every member had signed a letter circulated for any purpose. Robert and his family should take pride in the overwhelming support his dream had with the people of Connecticut. It has been my honor to work with the Bingham family and be part of the process that brought us here today. I was pleased to read in a newspaper in my district that of the 21 issues that will be released this year, the most requests came in for Hiram Bingham. I am proud that the U.S. Postal Service has included Hiram Bingham in its tribute to American Diplomats. Last year, I had an opportunity to visit Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Martyrs' and Heros' Remembrance Authority, in Jerusalem. Hearing and seeing the stories of survival made Hiram's work even more profound for me. Evil is often easy to identify, yet it is often difficult to oppose. To do so requires courage and a strong moral core. Hiram Bingham had both. He put his moral obligation above his career and he put his personal safety above his career. He paid a price, but heroes are often required to do just that. Hiram Bingham did not solicit accolades for what he had done. He did not desire to surpass others at all cost--he desired to serve others at all cost. And that is as good a definition of a ``hero'' as I have seen. Hiram Bingham could have gone along with the orders that came to his desk, but he chose not to. Going along is always easy. Doing the right thing is often difficult. But by doing the difficult thing, Hiram Bingham is today known as one of 11 ``righteous diplomats'' who together saved 200,000 people from the Holocaust. Today the descendents of those 200,000 individuals total more than 1 million. That is a tremendous legacy for one's life's work. I am pleased that this long overdue honor is being awarded to Hiram Bingham, a ``righteous diplomat'' who put his sense of right and wrong and his capacity to help others ahead of personal considerations.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I am concerned about the fact that we have been flat- funding rail security over the last several years. Millions of tons of hazardous materials are shipped daily across America's rail lines. And any one of these shipments could become potentially a weapon of mass destruction. Also, millions and millions of passengers travel our passenger rails every day and could be placed at risk by a terrorist attack. Let's just look at the record. In the year 2001, a 60-car freight train carrying hazardous materials derailed in a tunnel in Baltimore and literally shut down the city. In March 2004, a series of coordinated attacks in Madrid, Spain, killed 192 people. In July of 2005, three bombs exploded in the British or the London Underground; 56 people were killed and 700 were injured. We see from these terrorist attacks abroad that there is a pattern of activity and an ability to target these rail systems successfully. And yet here in the United States, we have flat-funded security for our passenger rail and for our freight rail. My family rides the rails virtually every day. I have got relatives in Connecticut who commute into New York City. My wife goes to Boston twice a week. When my daughter and my niece come up from New York, they ride the rails. So this may not appear to be a hazard to some of our colleagues who live in parts of the country that do not rely as heavily as we do on rail transportation, but what we have discovered from talking to the Amtrak police over the last several months is that there are three Amtrak policemen covering the route, stationed in New Haven and covering the route roughly from the New York border to Providence. Another three out of Baltimore covering the routes north and south from New York and to Washington, D.C. This does not seem to be an adequate investment of personnel to cover these passenger trains that go along these tracks on a daily basis. Furthermore, the Amtrak police have a tremendous turnover of personnel. They have lost 100 percent of their personnel over the last 10 years due to the lack of a contract, a lack of adequate funding and a lack of benefits. And new personnel that come in and train frequently leave after a year or so to get better paying jobs in municipal police forces around the northeastern United States. This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. My colleagues have referred to our fighting the last war. And we have done a magnificent job in providing resources for aviation. We have done very well. But we seem to have forgotten that more people travel on our passenger rails on a daily basis than fly. And less people and less dollars are applied to this problem. The American Public Transportation Association has written to us on the subject and has pointed out that rail security is seriously underfunded. So I am glad to join my colleagues in supporting this amendment to H.R. 5441. I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee for all of his hard work and especially the staff. But I think this is an area where we need to add some more dollars.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. My recollection of the appropriations process is that, if an appropriation takes place, it carries with it the authority to expend those funds. So if you look at previous appropriations for this purpose, I believe that those appropriations reflect the authority to spend that money. The issue now becomes oversight. I quite frankly think that Members of this body who live in their districts usually have a pretty good idea of where these dollars are going. Speaking for myself, I probably am in and out of the Mystic Aquarium at least half a dozen times a year, sometimes more frequently. I am intimately involved with the activities of this facility. Dr. Robert Ballard, who used to be located in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, came to Connecticut and came to Mystic because of the resources there so he could pursue his research. He was sponsored by the State of Connecticut and the local municipality. People know what is going on here. People know of some of the incredible research that is taking place. People know because their kids and because the Boys Clubs and Girls Clubs are benefiting from these activities that are happening here. And Members know. I believe when a Member submits an earmark and follows it through the process, that tells you a lot about the earmark. I would put my name against this project any day of the week. I think that as somebody who knows my district, knows the people in my district, knows the reputation of this facility, knows of the impeccable reputation of Dr. Bob Ballard, that this is a good expenditure of taxpayer dollars, and I will stand up for it any day of the week.

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in opposition to the amendment. I thank my friend from Arizona for saying nice things about the Mystic Aquarium. I appreciate that. It is a great aquarium. It is a nonprofit. It is an educational facility. It is a facility that has been in operation for over 20 years. Earlier he asked the question as to whether there had been any prior authorizations. In actual fact, the activities of the aquarium have attracted funding in fiscal years 2006, 2005 and 2004. The moneys that we are talking about here tonight are not just moneys that are going to purchase fish food and clean the tanks. The moneys that we are talking about here tonight are to develop a research and environmental education center as a part of this research center. Most of our colleagues have heard of Dr. Bob Ballard. Dr. Bob Ballard is the foremost ocean explorer in the world today. He is collocated at the Mystic Aquarium. His institute for exploration is collocated in the facility. His name is on the application. The question could be asked: Well, okay, we have private sponsors. We have State and local sponsors, but what should be the responsibility of the Federal Government when it comes to marine science, marine research and ocean exploration? Well, one Federal dollar in this program creates a minimum of $10 from other sources. So one Federal dollar can be leveraged 10 to 20 times for these types of activities. Why would the American taxpayer care about that? Well, I tell you why they care about it. Because we intimately involve young people with these activities. Two-thirds of the Nation's fourth through ninth graders are scoring below proficiency levels in science. The National Science Foundation indicates students are pursuing graduate degrees in declining numbers. The activities of this aquarium and the activities of Dr. Bob Ballard turn kids on to science. That is a good thing. That is something we should support. I urge my colleague to withdraw his amendment.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5122, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes. This important legislation was made possible thanks to the leadership of House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter of California and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chairman Roscoe G. Bartlett of Maryland. These leaders have taken a long and hard look at how best to fulfill our national security needs, and they have led the committee into action. This is nowhere more evident and important than in the House's shipbuilding budget. This defense bill is nothing short of historic; it marks a turning point in Congress' view of the United States Submarine Force and our undersea fleet's role in the Global War on Terror and beyond. The House has validated what many of us have long known: that our submarine fleet is the backbone of our Navy's efforts in the Global War on Terror, and that it is critical to deterring aggression by potential adversaries. H.R. 5122 accelerates production of Virginia Class submarines to help the Navy meet its stated requirement of 48 ships. Without adding funding for two submarines per year starting in 2009, the U.S. submarine fleet will eventually drop to 40 or less, presenting our fighting forces with an unacceptable level of risk. It would be irresponsible to set a force level requirement and then miss that goal by some 20 percent. That is why this bill also requires the Department of Defense to maintain a submarine fleet of 48 ships, consistent with the Navy's stated needs. Shame on Congress should it ever turn its back on our Nation's naval requirements, especially in a time of war. Article one, section eight of the United States Constitution states that ``Congress shall provide and maintain a Navy.'' Our republic's charter document does not vest this authority with any other body--not the President, not the Department of Defense, and not special interests. Congress must ultimately take responsibility for a hollow Navy, and it is Congress that must answer to the American people if our sailors fail for lack of material support. Today, I am proud to say that this body has acted honorably and ably to execute this charge. Mr. Chairman, history tells us that we cannot wait for danger to find us. There is a growing threat across the Pacific that we simply cannot ignore. 70 years ago, with the leadership of another House chairman, Congressman Carl Vinson, Congress funded our shipbuilding accounts at a level that prepared us for the turmoil of World War II. Had this body not taken action years before the conflict, the Untied States Navy would not have had the capability to stand up to fascism overseas. In fact, in the first 18 months after Pearl Harbor, the U.S. had barely enough carriers to hold the line, let alone project power in the Pacific. At one point in November 1942, only two carriers were operational in that vast ocean. We can only imagine the outcome had Chairman Vinson chose inaction instead of resolve. Today, we must look forward with the lessons of our past. We must imagine our future if we let our Navy's submarine force atrophy at a time when its missions are only growing. We must try to envision what will come to pass if the U.S. Navy cannot check a near peer in the Pacific Ocean because it is overstretched and under-equipped. As we consider the current and future threats to our Nation, I am thankful that we have Members of the Armed Services Committee willing to act in the spirit of Chairman Vinson. So, Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the H.R. 5122 knowing that this bill represents a giant step toward facing the threats of today and tomorrow. We have won the first battle to supply this great Nation with the Navy it requires.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment. I had the honor to serve 4 years on active duty in the U.S. Army and over 30 years as a member of the U.S. Army Reserve, and as somebody who has commanded troops who have deployed, there is nothing more demoralizing to get unequal pay for equal duty. To support a resolution that provides for equity for our Guard and Reserve is very important. I thank the gentleman for his amendment.

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time, and thank the chairman and my colleagues from across the aisle for bringing fairness and peace of mind to our defense workers.

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First, I would like to commend Chairman Hunter and Mr. Bartlett, as well as Mr. Skelton and Mr. Taylor for their leadership and vision on this bill. This bill is particularly historic with respect to the shipbuilding programs that it supports. But I am rising today, Mr. Chairman, to offer a bipartisan amendment that would protect our industrial base workers from losing their jobs because of the failure of our Federal bureaucracy to process security clearances and periodic updates. Last month, without warning or notice to Congress, the Defense Security Service stopped processing security clearance background checks and periodic updates for defense contractor workers. What makes this most frustrating is the fact that the Department of Defense said it had fixed the security clearance problems last year when it transferred responsibility for these investigations to the Office of Personnel Management. Many of us who have defense workers in our district questioned DSS on that point, but they were emphatic that OPM could get the job done. Well, Mr. Chairman, they were wrong. We cannot allow their failure to result in cleared defense workers losing their jobs. Very simply, this amendment would prevent the Department of Defense from firing workers whose security clearance may have expired through no fault of their own. It does not change the security clearance process or prevent the Department from revoking security clearances for reasons other than the backlog, but it does protect our workers who currently have clearances that simply need to be updated. Those already at work eventually need renewals to stay on the job, and there are thousands of shipyard workers in my district and elsewhere across the country who need clearances updated to design and build the best ships in the world. But we must give these defense workers peace of mind that they won't be out on the street because of a botched job in the bowels of the Pentagon. Our amendment has support from both sides of the aisle as well as from numerous national security organizations, and I include for the Record a list of these associations. I urge my colleagues to support the Simmons-Davis-Davis amendment to keep American defense workers at work. Security Clearance Coalition Supports Simmons/Davis Amendment to H.R. 5122 The associations listed below have joined in coalition to work to address the significant problems their members encounter negotiating the security granting process. All of the problems that this process has experienced for the last several years were severely compounded when the Defense Security Service placed a moratorium on the acceptance of new security clearance applications and applications for periodic reinvestigations at the end of April. The coalition supports the Simmons/Davis amendment as a positive first step toward reversing the impact of this decision and to mitigating its impact. While the ability to attract, hire and retain qualified personnel who are able to get a clearance has been greatly impacted, this proposal will at least assure those that currently employed and holding a clearance that their job will not be impacted because of their inability to submit an application for reinvestigation. The actions by DSS are symptomatic of the chronic problems found in the Federal government's security granting process. We hope that Congress will act to mitigate the impact of this action by adopting the Simmons/Davis amendment. It is also our hope that Congress will recognize the need to overhaul the entire clearance granting process and work with this coalition and others to bring about a more enlightened and 21st Century approach to providing trusted personnel to meet our National Security needs. Please vote yes in support of the Simmons/Davis Amendment. Aerospace Industries Association Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association Contract Services Association Information Technology Association of America Intelligence and National Security Alliance National Defense Industrial Association Professional Services Council Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, it is often said one of the best things we can do in this world is to take a tragedy and use it as a catalyst to do something positive. The April 5th death of a 64-year-old homeless man, Bill Walsh, in the woods of southeastern Connecticut has become a rallying cry for the homeless. I hope that the death of Bill Walsh will be turned into something positive. As a Vietnam veteran I have long been involved in addressing the dilemma of homelessness. Vietnam divided our nation and many soldiers returned from Southeast Asia with a variety of troubles. On far too many occasions their troubles led them to the streets and to the ranks of the homeless. We know that many of the homeless suffer from addictions and mental problems. We will never be able to help them secure a home and until their lifestyle issues are addressed. In Connecticut we are taking action. A coalition of business leaders, social service agencies and government officials have produced the Southeastern Connecticut Ten Year Plan To End Homelessness. The three pronged attack seeks to establish a safety net by identifying social services available to the homeless and finding more effective ways to deliver them. Supportive housing is an essential component--supportive housing helps address issues of heart and head while providing a place to live. In supportive housing complexes individuals find companionship, security and a staff that will help them address issues such as substance abuse, education and other barriers that prevent people from participating as productive members of society. The third part of the program is to help the homeless find employment. I attended Bill Walsh's funeral and those who knew him described him as ``a gentle soul'', ``just like us'', and a ``sweet man who never bothered anybody.'' No doubt we also would all agree that a 64-year-old ``gentle soul'' should not be living in the woods. Many families are one paycheck away from being homeless. They are our neighbors and our friends. Those who are already experiencing life on the street or in the shelter are in need of support. A society that is dedicated to helping others help themselves will take the tragedy of Bill Walsh and use it as motivation to address homelessness. I believe ours is such a society. In attendance at Mr. Walsh's funeral was the Rev. Emmett Jarrett, of St. Francis House, in New London. He made some insightful and compassionate remarks about Bill Walsh. I ask by unanimous consent that his meditation be included with my statement for the Record. Seeing The Invisible: A Meditation on Luke 16:19-25 (By Fr. Emmett Jarrett, TSSF) The story you have just heard--the story of Lazarus, the poor beggar, and the rich man--is one of the stories Jesus told to call people to live not in selfish isolation but as sisters and brothers. It's also a story that Martin Luther King, Jr., the great American patriot, preached on many occasions, including the last Sunday sermon he ever preached, a few days before he was assassinated in April, 1968. King said of this story that it was not about Jesus condemning wealth, or the rich. ``There is nothing in that parable,'' King said, ``that said [the rich man] went to hell because he was rich. . . . [He] didn't go to hell because he was rich; [he] didn't realize that his wealth was his opportunity . . . to bridge the gulf that separated him from his brother, Lazarus. [He] went to hell because he passed Lazarus by every day and he never really saw him. He went to hell because he allowed his brother to become invisible.'' Our country remembers Dr. King because of his dream that America would some day fulfill its promise and become a land of freedom and equality for all. But King was not just a great patriot, he was not just a great civil rights leader. He was also a leader in the movement to end the war in Vietnam. He was a leader in the struggle to end poverty in our country. When he preached his last sermon at the Washington National Cathedral in 1968 he was on his way to Memphis, Tenn., to support sanitation workers in a strike for decent wages. He was preparing to lead a national march on Washington from the rural South, from Appalachia, from the ghettos of Northern cities, a march of white people as well as black people, a ``poor people's march.'' He was working to make the invisible people in our country visible. He was working for brotherhood and sisterhood, for what he called ``the beloved community.'' We are gathered here today to remember an invisible brother, Bill Walsh, who died in the woods a few days after the New London winter emergency shelter closed. Bill died in the woods--technically in Waterford--but he was a New London resident. His last residence had been the shelter at St. James Church around the corner, but his last proper home was an apartment in the Mohican just down State Street from here. But Bill was invisible, and so he died, without the minimal attention any human being requires and is entitled to. Like Lazarus, the poor beggar in Jesus' parable, Bill was our brother, and most of us didn't see him. So we gather here today in the First Congregational Church of New London, the church where Bill worshipped, and where he ate breakfast many mornings. Because the beloved community includes not only like-minded people who worship together, but people who break bread together, people who eat together. As the prophet Isaiah says, the life God asks of his people, of us, is a practical life of friendship and service. God requires of us that we ``share our bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into our house'' (Isa. 58:7). It is appropriate, then, that we gather this morning and remember Bill, and pray for him and for ourselves. But we will not be the beloved community if we do not accept our responsibility for Bill's neglect, and for his death. The great rabbi Abraham Heschel said that ``in a democracy, some are guilty, but all are responsible.'' All of us, as a community, as the people of the City of New London, are responsible when some of our brothers and sisters, some of our neighbors made in the image of God, have no place to lay their head. Thomas Jefferson said about slavery in America, ``I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just.'' Well, friends, I tremble for our country today. There are more than three million homeless people in the richest nation in the world. We are that rich man, who went to hell not because he was rich but because he allowed his brother Lazarus to become invisible. We have an opportunity to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and shelter the homeless. It's no use blaming other towns and cities. God will judge them. It is myself and my city that I tremble for. It is for New London that I will be judged. So I ask you this morning, as we remember Bill Walsh, to join the struggle in our city to make him and others like him visible. I invite you this morning to see the homeless poor, many of whom are present in this house of worship today. Look around you. See your neighbors. Some of your neighbors have homes to go to tonight. Some don't. But all of us are neighbors. All of us are brothers and sisters to Bill Walsh and to one another. Let us resolve today, in his memory, to make our city a ``city on a hill,'' to which everyone can look for inspiration, to make our country ``a light to the nations,'' that cares for its neediest citizens. We have to see each other to do that. As the great labor organizer Mother Jones said, ``we've got to mourn the dead, but fight like hell for the living.'' We can't bring Bill Walsh back from the dead. He is with Lazarus, the poor beggar that Jesus talked about, ``in Abraham's bosom.'' But we can see the invisible poor, and shelter the homeless and needy, and not find ourselves under judgment for our failure to see. Now let us remember Bill. But let us get up tomorrow morning and start to work together to create a homeless hospitality center in New London that will be a model for the rest of our region and our nation. Let us see the invisible poor, and live together with all our sisters and brothers in the beloved community the God of justice invites us to become. Then Bill will be like one who has risen from the dead and brought us to the promised land.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor to recognize a man who has long been one of Connecticut's, and America's, great sports treasures. For 21 seasons Geno Auriemma has coached the University of Connecticut's Lady Huskies Basketball team. During that time he has led the Huskies to 5 national championships. His teams have compiled an incredible record of 589 wins with only 116 losses. In his tenure as head coach the team has gone to the Final Four eight times and achieved two perfect seasons--that is an NCAA record for consecutive wins. He is the only coach to take a team to 5 straight Final Fours. For the 2002- 03 season Coach Auriemma was named the Big East Coach of the Year as well as the United States Basketball Writer's Association Women's Basketball Coach of the Year; he was also named Coach of the Year by the Associated Press. His leadership, his personal integrity and his deep commitment to his players, both on and off the court, has now earned him the ultimate recognition that his sport can bestow. This year Coach Geno Auriemma will be inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in Springfield, Massachusetts. He is a first-time candidate, which makes this honor all the more a special. The personal story of Coach Auriemma is inspirational. It is truly an American story. Born in Naples, Italy, his family was poor. At the age of 7 Geno arrived in this country unable to speak English. But he grew up to achieve the American Dream. His rise from poor Italian immigrant to one of the most successful coaches in college history stands as an example of what happens when hard work coupled with an indomitable spirit meets opportunity. In 1985, while assistant coach at Virginia, Coach Auriemma was offered the head coach position with the University of Connecticut Lady Huskies. He had long desired such an opportunity. Now, at that time UConn's Lady Huskies had no great tradition of winning and no significant fan base. In their 11 year history, the Lady Huskies had compiled only 1 winning season. But the coach had a vision and he took the job. He set goals for himself and for his team and within a few years the Lady Huskies were a rising force. Through hard work, a profound understanding of his sport and the ability to motivate his players in such a way that they draw the best that is within them, Coach Auriemma has transformed the Lady Huskies into a force to be reckoned with on the court. UConn fans across Connecticut and the United States look forward every year to cheering on the Huskies and they know they're going to see a top team that is prepared and ready for Showtime. But the real lesson to be learned from the Huskies is that winning does not begin on the court. Winning begins in the preparation, both mental and physical. That is a lesson all great coaches teach their players and it is a lesson all great athletes understand. And it is something that all winners throughout our society know. To prepare for a game or a test, to get ready for a challenge or a certain moment-- that is what winning is about. For more than 20 seasons Coach Auriemma has been a winner and he has communicated what it takes to achieve to the athletes that have gone through his program. The fact that those players have all gone on to attain success long after they left UConn is a testament to their mentor--Coach Geno Auriemma. Congratulations, coach, and thanks for 21 wonderful seasons. We look forward to the next 21.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Canine Volunteer Protection Act of 2006. I do so because I am an advocate of protecting our service animals while they perform their duties. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, there were reports of first responders having difficulty working with local authorities. In some instances their dogs were threatened and their handlers were harassed as these first responders bravely carried out their duties. It was because of these reports, Mr. Speaker, that a constituent of mine, Ms. Amy Stegal of Stafford Springs, CT, contacted me and asked that we provide protection for these invaluable canine rescuers. Ms. Stegal is affiliated with Connecticut Canine Search and Rescue, CCSAR. This important organization was incorporated in 1994 as a volunteer, nonprofit organization dedicated to providing a professional team response to all emergency service agency requests for lost, missing or drowned persons; advancing education in search and rescue procedures; and offering support for families of lost and missing persons. Mr. Speaker, these dogs and their handlers heroically volunteer their time and expertise in times of natural disaster, yet they are not protected by Federal law. The Canine Volunteer Protection Act would give members of volunteer canine search and rescue teams, such as CCSAR members, the same protections current law gives other law enforcement animals. This includes both a monetary fine and/or imprisonment of those persons who willfully and maliciously harm any search and rescue dog. I urge my colleagues to support this measure to protect search and rescue teams as they selflessly perform their rescue missions. I thank Ms. Stegal of Stafford Springs for bringing this important issue to my attention.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, on December 12 a good man, a fine public servant and a good friend of mine died at the age of 65. Marvin Chase lived in North Stonington and during his lifetime he was truly a citizen in action. For those of us who knew him, his name is synonymous with public service, a love of his community and a deep love for his family and friends. Marvin was involved with his community. He was a Republican but he was from the school of thought that said, ``I don't care what your political affiliation is, I care about you and I care about your ideas.'' Consequently, he was able to work with individuals from across the political spectrum. He liked and respected people; and he was liked and respected in return. A 6-year member of the North Stonington Economic Development Commission, which he chaired, Marvin won another 5-year term in November. First Selectman Nicholas H. Mullane II, said Marvin was ``probably the best chairman I've ever seen on the EDC.'' Marvin did more than keep the seat warm. In 2003 he led the commission as it studied the best way to bring business to town. He also led the commission's two-year effort to create a low-impact commercial development zone near Interstate 95 exit 92, which the Planning and Zoning Commission approved in February. And that zone change drew immediate interest from businesses. Marvin was always sensitive of the need to balance business with the rural nature of our community and our region in southeastern Connecticut. He wanted to attract businesses so that taxes could be kept under control and so that there would be jobs; but he knew how important it was to ensure that North Stonington kept the quiet characteristics that make it such a wonderful place to live and raise a family. Marvin belonged to the North Stonington Grange, served on the North Stonington Fair Committee and for more than 30 years he was a member of what is now the Masonic United Coastal Lodge 57. A former deacon of United Church in Stonington, Marvin served until a few years ago as moderator of the First Baptist Church in North Stonington. He was chairman of the North Stonington Republican Town Committee and a lifetime member of the North Stonington Fire Company. Marvin worked for the State of Connecticut Motor Vehicle Department as an inspector for the Dealers and Repairers Division and he owned and operated a Shell Service Station in Preston for many years. There was also a racy side to Marvin--he drove race cars at the Thompson Motor Speedway, Norwood Arena, Waterford Speedbowl and Stafford Speedway from 1960 to 2001. And he was vice president of the New England Antique Racer's Association. Finally, Marvin played a significant role in all of my political campaigns, offering me his sage advice and insights to a variety of issues. His was always a voice of reason and sound judgment. He was a friend--and a friend can tell you things you do not want to tell yourself. But those are often things you most need to hear. I will miss him greatly.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of Gladys Tantaquidgeon, whose life's work greatly enhanced the Mohegan Tribe of Connecticut. On November 1, the woman who was rightly known as the ``keeper of the Mohegan culture'' died at the age of 106. Gladys Tantaquidgeon was a woman of uncommon integrity and cheerful determination. Throughout her life she devoted her skills, talents and knowledge to the revival of the Mohegan Tribe and countless lives have been enriched by her steadfastness. Gladys Tantaquidgeon was an anthropologist and ethnobotanist. She wrote extensively about Native Americans and her knowledge was wide- ranging. She played a key role in establishing the Mohegan tribal museum. Her flawless record-keeping and her encyclopedic knowledge of the history of her tribe were instrumental in helping the Mohegans win Federal recognition in 1994. In the Hartford Courant, Melissa Tantaquidgeon Zobel, Gladys's grandniece, pointed out that much of the artwork in the tribe's Mohegan Sun Casino, in Montville, was inspired by the collection of the ``keeper of Mohegan culture.'' Ms. Zobel recently remarked, ``We all have to wonder, would we be where we are today without her? She was an image from another world. It would be dishonorable not to celebrate her passing.'' The Mohegan Tribe today is successful by any measure and they most certainly would not be where they are today without the perseverance and stamina of this incredible woman. Supported in no small measure by her work, the tribe has preserved its heritage and history and has created economic security for the future. The Mohegan Sun Casino has created jobs throughout the region, has provided economic assistance to its host community and works with vendors throughout the State. And while the tribe and the entire region mourns her death, we surely celebrate the extraordinary life of this great woman who was a descendent of Uncas, the famous Mohegan chief. She demonstrated that the Mohegan's history is an integral and essential part of Connecticut's history. The Hartford Courant said it well, observing that Gladys Tantaquidgeon was ``the living link between past and present whose diligent record-keeping led to federal recognition for the Mohegans. They are now running one of the world's most lucrative casinos and are fabulously rich. It is telling that they are prouder of their heritage than their wildly successful business venture.'' The Mohegan Tribe and the State of Connecticut are better off because of Gladys Tantaquidgeon. She did much more than enable her people to secure the recognition they deserved. She taught, by word and example, that our lives as Americans are deeply entwined and that history is not something that happened in the past. History is alive and even as it reminds us of who we were, it also reminds us of what we might become. Gladys Tantaquidgeon was an exceptional woman. The Mohegan Tribe and Connecticut are fortunate that for more than a century she was among us. She will be missed.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this legislation, H.R. 3963, to reauthorize appropriations for the Long Island Sound Restoration Act set to expire at the end of this year. I want to thank Chairman Duncan for his very distinguished work in carrying this forward, as well as the chairman of the full committee, Chairman Young. And in particular, I would like to thank my co-chair of the Long Island Sound Caucus, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel), who has worked with me in a bipartisan fashion, and also the gentleman from, I believe, the First District of New York (Mr. Bishop), who actually assisted during the mark-up of this legislation when I had to be away. This is a classic case of Members of this body working across party lines, working across State lines for the common good; and I thank them for that support. As we have heard, Long Island Sound is a unique estuary in our country with both economic and ecological importance to the region and to the whole Nation. The sound generates between 5 and $6 billion of revenue on an annual basis and is cherished by the 28 million people who live within 50 miles of it. Think about that: 28 million people, 28 million American citizens live within 50 miles of Long Island Sound. That is 10 percent of the Nation's population, and they can benefit from this wonderful resource. The Long Island Sound today is challenged by nitrogen loading that leads to hypoxia or low dissolved oxygen. The best way to defeat this problem is to remove significant levels of nitrogen from wastewater through complicated and expensive upgrades to sewage treatment plants. Connecticut, New York, and the Environmental Protection Agency have committed to reducing this nitrogen loading to the sound by 50 percent by 2014. But this cannot be done without this legislation and without the funds that this legislation carries. That is why this legislation is so critically important. Mr. Speaker, I submit for printing in the Record the following three letters as an example of the support that we have back home for this legislation: Executive Chambers, State Capitol, Hartford, CT, October 25, 2005. Hon. Don Young, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Young: I am writing to urge your vigorous support for H.R. 3963, a bill to extend the authorization of appropriations from the Long Island Sound Restoration Act of 2000 (``LISRA'') (Title IV of Public Law 106-457). As detailed in the attached fact sheet, the approximately 9.7 million dollars in LISRA funds awarded to Connecticut have benefited over 16 distressed communities in Connecticut. The distressed communities have utilized the funds to plan for and design upgrades at their sewage treatment plants to remove nitrogen, the most significant threat to water quality in Long Island Sound. Long Island Sound (LIS or Sound) is a complex and unique estuary, and Connecticut's most precious environmental resource. The Sound has a 16,000 square mile watershed that is home to approximately 10 percent of the population of the United States. LIS contributes more that $6 billion to the regional economy, through activities such as boating, commercial and sport fishing, swimming, and beach going. The ports of Bridgeport, New Haven and New London handle national and international freight. The Sound is facing a number of serious challenges due to the developed nature of its watershed, including excessive nitrogen loading that causes hypoxia or low dissolved oxygen. Connecticut, New York and the Environmental Protection Agency have committed to reducing nitrogen loading to the Sound by 58.5% by 2014 to address the hypoxia. Such reduction can best be accomplished by upgrading sewage treatment plants to remove nitrogen, a process that requires a substantial investment in planning, design and construction. A federal appropriation under LISRA will leverage Connecticut's state based initiatives to control nitrogen. To date, Connecticut has invested over $150 million from our state Clean Water Fund to upgrade sewage treatment plants to remove nitrogen. We estimate that demand for funds to control nitrogen in the next two fiscal years will be over $200 million, with that amount increasing in future fiscal years. In summary, the Long Island Sound Restoration Act provides a critical federal contribution to projects designed to restore the health of Long Island Sound. Further, the funds are used by Connecticut to assist our distressed communities in doing their part to restore Long Island Sound, an estuary of national significance. Thank you in advance for your support. Sincerely, M. Jodi Rell, Governor.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution. I am proud to be a Vietnam veteran. I am proud to have spent almost 4 years in that country with the U.S. Army and the Central Intelligence Agency, but I was not proud when Members of Congress, Members of this body, criticized us in the course of that war publicly back here at home. Their critical comments were demoralizing and undercut our efforts. It encouraged our enemy, and it placed us at risk. At some point in the 1970s, our national will broke down, we cut and ran. We left our friends behind, my colleagues, my counterparts. And we abandoned Southeast Asia to unprecedented slaughter and destruction. Now 30 years later I find myself on this same floor talking about the ``immediate redeployment'' of our troops from a foreign battlefield where they are fully engaged in a difficult and dangerous mission. More than anyone else, this Vietnam veteran wants to see our troops come home safely, successfully and soon. But now is not the time for immediate withdrawal. Now is the time to support our troops and the values they fight for.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Mrs. Rosa Lee Parks. Mrs. Parks's refusal to give up her seat to a white man on a bus in Alabama in 1955 triggered a 381-day boycott of buses, organized by the then little-known Baptist minister Martin Luther King Jr. She did so without knowing the support she would rally. Her single act of quiet courage and defiance on that December day undeniably became a watershed moment in the history of U.S. civil rights. It's most fitting that at today's funeral in Detroit, R&B legend Aretha Franklin sang ``The Impossible Dream'' in honor of Mrs. Parks. It was that action nearly 50 years ago that sparked what seemed at the time to be the impossible dream of the modern civil rights movement, culminating in the 1964 federal Civil Rights Bill. In 1996, Mrs. Parks received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, awarded to civilians who make outstanding contributions to American life. In 1999, she was awarded the Congressional gold medal, the nation's highest civilian honor. Mr. Speaker, with the permission of this House, I would like to enter into the Record the words of a civil rights leader in my community, the Rev. Dr. Benjamin K. Watts, Pastor of the Shiloh Baptist Church in New London (CT). ``Rosa Parks was a woman of character, commitment and courage. When she sat down the world stood up against injustice, bigotry and hatred. Mrs. Parks was not the first to refuse to live down to the status quo of inequality yet because of her unimpeachable character she unwittingly became a spark that ignited the flame of passion that created ultimate change. Like Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in baseball, the right character was necessary in order to break the back of racism. Her commitment to social justice gave her iconoclastic status as the epitome of courage and commitment. Her passing leaves a void in civil society that each one of us should seek to fill by living lives of high moral value always refusing to sit at the back of the bus of life and ready to accept our place at the forefront of the battle for social change.''--Rev. Dr. Benjamin K. Watts Mrs. Rosa Lee Parks, this great American hero, deserves not only our tributes and gratitude, but our continuing commitment to peace, justice, equality, and freedom for all. May God rest her soul.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I stand in opposition today to H.J. Res. 65, a resolution to disapprove the recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission. I oppose this resolution not because I support this BRAC round and the closure and realignment of these bases, but because the Department of Defense should not be authorized to execute another one anytime soon. A no vote on this resolution will spare the Armed Forces, our defense budget and our base communities the unnecessary stress of another BRAC round if the current recommendations are approved. I opposed this BRAC round from the start for several reasons. First and foremost, Mr. Chairman, were--and remain--a nation at war. We have troops abroad fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and globally as part of a broader war on terrorism. I argued that we need to focus all of our energy on supporting those troops in the field. We should not be distracted with the complicated burden of realigning our whole military base structure. In October of 2003, I went to Iraq and learned that the troops desperately needed armor on their vehicles. In November of 2003 the Secretary of the Army said that getting armor into the field was a ``top priority''. And yet today there are still tens of thousands of vehicles that are still not armored. Just last week the Armed Services Committee held a hearing on the issue. Chairman Hunter discovered that the Army was sitting on hundreds of armored humvees in Texas and Kuwait. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if Congress would have unearthed this hidden problem earlier had it not been faced with the time-consuming BRAC process. I opposed BRAC because we need to recapitalize our aging defense platforms and our shrinking fleets. Our Armed Forces have been on a strict diet because of a procurement holiday that has been in effect since the end of the Cold war. Mr. Chairman, the average age of an Air Force bombers is over 30 years old. The average pilot is younger than his aircraft. Yet there are planned procurement cuts to the F-22 program. We have been living on the Reagan buildup of the 1980s, but those systems are all nearing retirement. What's left from the 80s is old and undependable. This threatens our military readiness and the safety of our service members. Mr. Chairman, this year the Navy planned on building only four ships--the same as Canada and less than most of our European allies. If we stay on this track, our fleet will shrink from a little under 300 to just 120. China is on no such diet. Its shipbuilding rates are so high that its fleet win overtake ours by about 2015. By that time, China will have twice as many submarines as the U.S. I also opposed BRAC because our strategic environment remains in flux. The threats from North Korea, China and Iran are rising while we are still engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. We benefited from neither the Quadrennial Defense Review nor the report of the Overseas Basing Commission because they were not yet delivered. How could we know, what our Nation's future basing requirements will be? We couldn't! I opposed BRAC because DOD still maintained dozens of bases that were slated for closure that remain open. How could we target another 100 bases when we had a hundred waiting on death row? Closing bases costs billions of dollars in environmental clean up costs. The Department of Defense cannot dispose of this property until it is clean. But the investment of these ``clean-up'' dollars takes dollars away from our troops in the field during war. I opposed this BRAC round because we have hundreds of thousands of troops in the Middle East, Europe and Korea that will hopefully return home soon. Congress authorized the BRAC round anyway. The Department of Defense relatively little time to develop a set of recommendations for the President. Not surprisingly, some mistakes were made. The biggest mistake was the recommendation to close Naval Submarine Base New London, the world's greatest center of excellence for undersea warfare. My good friend, the Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, Ike Skelton, noted that the BRAC round so suffered from secondary agendas designed to achieve policy outcomes under cover of base closure and realignment. I agree with him. The BRAC Commission had even less time than the Pentagon, but was ultimately able to fix the largest mistakes. Chairman Anthony Principi's commission took New London and other bases off of the list after looking at the big picture. They looked at the overall effects on the Nation and the individual services. They listened to the arguments of outside experts. They considered the advice of key defense industry partners, senior retired officers, Members of Congress, and even a former U.S. president. In the end the BRAC Commission gave the President and Congress a good product given the circumstances. So, Mr. Chairman, I will vote no on the resolution because the BRAC solution before us is the best of a bad situation. It would have been better never to have attempted this round of base closures. Our military is no better for it, and our Nation is no safer. Nevertheless, a vote for yes is a vote for another, painful and counterproductive BRAC round that will drain resources and time from the critical tasks at hand. Mr. Chairman, our Nation faces great national security challenges right now. For this reason, I will vote to put BRAC behind us today and for the foreseeable future.

Mr. SIMMONS

Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I was regrettably delayed in a meeting at the Pentagon, and was unable to be on the House Floor for rollcall votes 515 and 516. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall 515, the rule providing for consideration of the bill H.R. 3893 and ``yea'' on rollcall 516, approving the Journal.