Michael Sodrel

Mr. SODREL

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

Mr. SODREL

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

Mr. SODREL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the chairman and ranking member for bringing this bill forward, a bill that I was proud to cosponsor. H.R. 4128 is a good bill. It addresses a new-found power of government that frightens every homeowner and small businessman, the possibility of having their home or business involuntarily taken to be given to someone else to build some other business or development that government may prefer. Compounding that fear is the fear of having to go to court and pay to prove that the government violated the provisions of this bill, having to pay a lawyer and possibly hire experts to prove that the taking of their property is for economic development in violation of the act. My amendment clarifies that the burden of proof is on the State or the agency seeking to take the property, and the evidence it has provided must go beyond merely saying so. This issue is important enough that a court reviewing the taking should not give deference to the government assertions that the ultimate use of the property is for other than economic development as outlined in the act. The burden of proof should rightly be placed on the government entity that initiated the action, not on the property owner. I urge the adoption of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SODREL

Mr. SODREL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Missouri for yielding me this time. The American people have given the United States Congress the sole authority to levy taxes for the support of our national government. They have not given any constitutional authorization to any global organization to tax them, either directly or indirectly. It is important that we make perfectly clear to the United Nations that any effort towards international or global taxation is entirely unacceptable. We are currently paying almost 25 percent of the U.N.'s $2 billion annual budget. Many of my constituents already question whether that money is well spent. The Oil-For-Food questions have done little to instill confidence in the U.N. on the part of the American taxpayer. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. We do not want any misunderstanding on the part of the U.N. as to our position on the issue of international or global taxation. I thank the gentleman for this amendment.

Mr. SODREL

Mr. SODREL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak in favor of this amendment. Hampton Sides, in his book Ghost Soldiers, recounts the Ranger action to liberate the allied POWs from Cabanatuan in the Philippines. Most of them were survivors of the Bataan Death March. They were emaciated, sick and weak. Some of them had to be carried from the prison compound when it was taken by U.S. Army Rangers. What I will read now is the last paragraph of his narrative as told by its survivors. ``Along the way we saw an American flag set in a turret of a tank. It wasn't much of a flag, writhing in a weak breeze, but for the men of Cabanatuan, the sight was galvanizing. Ralph Hibbs said his heart stopped for he realized it was the first Stars and Stripes he'd seen since his surrender. All the men in all the trucks stood at attention and saluted. Then came the tears. ` We wept openly,' said Abie Abraham, `and we wept without shame.' '' Some say our flag is just a piece of cloth, Mr. Speaker. Grown men, particularly combat veterans, do not typically cry at the sight of a piece of cloth. To all patriots, particularly the majority that served under it, the American flag stands for liberty. To us, desecrating our flag is not a demonstration of liberty; it is an attack on liberty. If it were merely a piece of cloth, our enemies would not trouble themselves to desecrate it. All Americans are ``endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.'' Among those rights enumerated in our Constitution is the right of free speech. The Constitution does not, however, afford absolute freedom of action. One cannot spray-paint a bald eagle in protest. One cannot deface the Washington Monument. And one should not desecrate our flag with impunity either. To those who say that these actions have to be taken in context, if one burns a flag for a movie it is different from burning a flag as a protest, I would say that all actions have to be taken in context. If one takes another person's life in process of defending oneself, it is considered in a different context then if they took another person's life to collect a life insurance policy. All actions are always taken in context, and I trust the juries of the United States to take this amendment in proper context when it is carried out. I would like to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the flag protection amendment.

Mr. SODREL

Mr. SODREL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider in the House a resolution relating to the free election in Iraq held on January 30, 2005; that the resolution be considered as read; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to final adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. SODREL

Mr. SODREL. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 39) and ask for its immediate consideration.