Ellen Tauscher

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, at this time I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I was interested in my colleague, the last speaker's questions, the question about why do we have a nonbinding resolution and does it have any significance. I should say, no one should minimize the significance of this resolution. Passage by a bipartisan majority of the House of Representatives of this resolution opposing the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq would be a major turning point in the war debate. Despite the fact that it is nonbinding, passage would have enormous significance. This bipartisan resolution is serving as the basis for the first real debate on the President's flawed Iraq war policy since the war began nearly 4 years ago. Last November, the voters sent President Bush a loud and unmistakable message about Iraq, but the President didn't listen. As his announcement of an escalation of the war showed, passage of this bipartisan resolution is a second chance for the President to hear a strong, clear message that cannot be ignored. Passage of this bipartisan resolution will send another clear message: No more blank checks for the President on Iraq. In addition, passage of a nonbinding resolution opposing the President's escalation plan is only the first step in the Congress, demanding a changing of course in Iraq. When this resolution containing fewer than 100 words passes, we will take the country in a new direction in Iraq. A vote of disapproval will set the stage for additional legislation, which will be coming to the House floor. Furthermore, what is surprising, as I see my colleagues from the other side trot forward one after another, I have to remind them that in their 12 years in the majority, House Republicans passed hundreds, hundreds of nonbinding resolutions, including in very similar situations. For example, on October 30, 1995, the House Republican leadership brought to the floor and passed H. Res. 247, a nonbinding resolution repudiating President Clinton's pledge to deploy up to 20,000 troops to Bosnia as part of a peacekeeping force. I will remind my colleagues, Kosovo is about to be declared independent because the United States and NATO countries interceded and stopped the genocide there. That is a perfect example of wrongheaded policy that Democrats were able to put forward. Madam Speaker, at this time, I am happy to yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I am happy today, right now, to yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson).

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield such time as he may consume to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner).

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague from North Carolina (Mr. McIntyre).

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to rise to close this debate from our side and say how impressed I have been by the debate that I have heard today. It has been about 11 hours. We are going to have tomorrow and debate on Friday and Thursday, and this is the first real serious debate we have had about the President's policies in Iraq since the vote in October of 2002. This week the House is considering a bipartisan resolution introduced by Representative Ike Skelton of Missouri, Tom Lantos of California, and Walter Jones of North Carolina, which supports our troops and opposes the President's plan to add 21,500 more combat troops in Iraq. People have talked quite a lot tonight about the size and the scope of the resolution, but it is elegant and it is certainly spare in the fact that it is about 100 words, but it is significant because of what it says. The resolution is very straightforward. It says: ``Resolved by the House of Representatives that: ``(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and ``(2) Congress disapproves of the decision by President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.'' Those supporting this bipartisan resolution strongly support our troops and our veterans. Let us be clear on this one fundamental principle. We are honoring the service of our troops by asking the difficult questions about this war. In conducting this debate, we must be ever mindful of the sacrifices our military personnel and their families are making during this war and the toll it is taking on them and their families and our veterans. Each Member must determine for themselves, in a manner worthy of our troop's sacrifice, whether the President's plan will succeed in making Iraq more stable. I, for one, do not believe it will, and I strongly believe and hope that my colleagues will support this resolution and the debate that is coming forth in the next 2 days

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Madam Speaker, let me first thank my friend and colleague from California for her passion and her presence and for her leadership and also my other colleague Barbara Lee and for Lynn Woolsey and so many of my colleagues who have been indefatigable, unrelenting and brilliant in their insistence that we continue to put pressure on the administration and the President specifically for the litany of mistakes that have been made in Iraq, but at the same time holding deeply in our hearts the fighting men and women that come from all of our neighborhoods, come from all of our communities. For your patriotism, I cannot thank you enough. For your leadership and friendship, I will always be indebted. Madam Speaker, I cannot and will not support putting more American troops on the ground in Iraq. I stand here today more convinced than ever that the President's so-called new plan to send over 21,000 additional American troops to Iraq will only lead to further chaos. My opposition to this troop surge is built upon years of hearings in the House Armed Services Committee, where I serve as subcommittee chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, congressional briefings and five trips to the region, including three to Iraq, witnessing the war firsthand and speaking with our troops and commanders on the ground. Sadly, the President has gotten it very wrong every step of the way. Yet he continues to ask us to trust him. When the Republican-controlled Congress was rushing a vote to authorize the war in the middle of 2002's campaign season, I joined my friend Dennis Kucinich to call on the Republican leadership to take the politics out of the vote, take the decision to send our troops into harm's way seriously and postpone the vote until after the election. We wrote to our colleagues in October of 2002: ``It is incumbent upon us to address the matters of national security and decisions through the reasoned and deliberate process afforded us by our Constitution. This becomes particularly important when these decisions could possibly mean putting our young servicemen and women in harm's way. This is not a process that can be rushed for the sake of political expediency.'' Our best attempts failed. Congress was rushed to a vet, and we had no opportunity to sort through what we now know was the Bush administration's personal collection of cherry-picked or just plain false intelligence. The President made it clear that he wanted to rush to invade Iraq and prevent international weapons inspectors from finishing their job. I spoke out at the time saying, ``We must consider every peaceful alternative and contemplate every possible outcome before we turn to force.'' Our warnings were again ignored. In February of 2003, I co-authored legislation that would have required the President to submit a public report to Congress prior to initiating military action in Iraq. Our bill said: ``The United States should not proceed with unilateral or preemptive military action in Iraq, but if we do have to go to war to disarm Saddam, Congress needs to be sure there are sensible plans that will not compromise our ability to prosecute the War on Terror elsewhere or further destabilize an already volatile region.'' That same month, when then-Secretary of State Colin Powell presented the United Nations with the Bush administration's case on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, I again said, ``I continue to believe that the United States should not proceed with unilateral or preemptive military action.'' After the invasion, I remained concerned about the Bush administration's rush to war, and in July 2003 I authored legislation to create a select committee to hold public hearings to investigate several aspects of intelligence, including whether intelligence supported the claim that Iraq was an imminent threat to the United States, questioning the accuracy of intelligence that led the administration to believe Iraq was working with al Qaeda, and questioning the role of the Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon. The Republican-controlled Congress at the time would not allow my bill to see the light of day. In September 2003, the President requested an additional $87 billion to finance the war. In response, I authored legislation calling for explanations, noting that ``President Bush has not yet provided Congress with a detailed plan that outlines the strategic objectives of Operation Iraqi Freedom.'' I have sent dozens of letters to the President, Secretary Rice, Secretary Rumsfeld and others over the past 4\1/2\ years urging them to explain our mission and exit strategy for Iraq. I have offered suggestions to stabilize Iraq and bring our troops home sooner. Yet I have received few answers. Last week, I watched the President plead his case to the American people, trying to justify why more troops will save his failed policy. But yet again I was disappointed by the stubbornness exhibited by a President that has failed in Iraq every step of the way. I have stated throughout the timeline of the war that the Commander- in-Chief has the responsibility to define a well-articulated mission that has the support of the American people and an exit strategy to bring our troops home sooner and safer. The President has neither. Top military commanders in Iraq, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group and the American people all agree that sending more troops to Iraq will not end the civil war. They understand that we should immediately begin a strategic redeployment of U.S. troops in conjunction with diplomacy that forces Iraq's neighbors to step up as responsible regional partners. Adding additional troops further prevents the Iraqi government from taking responsibility for securing their own country. If the President sidesteps the Congress, he does this at his own peril, and sadly, he does it with the men and women of our Armed Forces and their families paying the highest price. This is why I am an original cosponsor of the Meehan legislation that requires the President to ask Congress for an up-or-down vote if he plans to raise troop levels in Iraq. I am not advocating cutting funds for the troops while they are in harm's way, but I am an advocate of conditioning all further spending for the Iraq War based on the Iraqis meeting security and political benchmarks and establishing a plan for the redeployment of our troops. I will continue to challenge the President to abandon his flawed troop surge policy, and I urge all of my colleagues to do the same. We owe it to our troops, to the American people and to our conscience.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of America's senior citizens. We in the Congress have a duty to provide the Secretary of Health and Human Services with all the tools necessary to grant seniors continuous access to affordable prescription drugs. This legislation, which I support, helps move in that direction. However, we must be careful that our actions do not restrict seniors' access to medicines prescribed to them by their doctors. And we must be careful to ensure that any changes to Part D do not diminish the ability of life sciences and biotechnology companies to continue innovation--innovation on the drugs that are extending and improving the quality of life for countless people around the globe, and innovation on future research that holds limitless promise. I also firmly believe that limiting formularies is not the way to go because it has a direct impact on limiting choice to seniors. We also need to address the donut hole created by the Republican- authored Medicare bill. It is wrong that we provide seniors help with their drugs, and then suddenly--that help stops. Coverage needs to be continuous. I look forward to working with my colleagues to rectify this problem. Our seniors deserve it.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Mayor Kathy Hicks who is retiring after prominently serving the City of Walnut Creek for 17 years. A resident of Walnut Creek since 1969, she has served on the City Council since November 1994, the City's Planning Commission and the Park, Recreation and Open Space Commission from 1990 to 1994, for which she served as chair. She also served as vice chair of the Walnut Creek Bicycle Advisory Committee, a member of the Boundary Oak Golf Course Advisory Committee, and the Creek Restoration Plan Task Force. She is past vice president of and current City Council liaison to Friends of the Creek, a non-profit organization supporting the creek restoration plan in downtown Walnut Creek. Mrs. Hicks represents the City as board member for the Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority, for which she served as chair in 1995 and negotiated a historic reduction in garbage collection rates as part of a new, longterm contract. Additionally, she serves on City Council subcommittees focusing on the library, youth and schools, community outreach, and economic development. Mrs. Hicks is also the City liaison to the Transportation Commission and serves as vice chair of the League of California Cities Community Services Policy Committee. Mrs. Hicks other community activities include membership in the Walnut Creek Open Space Foundation, the Friends of the Library, the Diablo Regional Arts Association, Ruth Bancroft Garden Conservancy, the Gardens at Heather Farm, the Walnut Creek Action for Beauty Council, the Lindsay Wildlife Museum, American Association of University Women, the National Women's Political Caucus and the League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley. Mrs. Hicks is also a 1994 graduate of the Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce ``Leadership Contra Costa.'' For the 17 years Mrs. Hicks has served the city of Walnut Creek, her hard work and dedication has proved to be a great asset to the community. Today, I am proud to commend her for her service to the community, her dedication to duty and her commitment to the people of Walnut Creek.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the Grand Opening of the new Fairfield Cordelia Library in the City of Fairfield, California. On December 14, 2006, at 10:00 a.m., the new Fairfield Cordelia Library, located on 5050 Business Center Drive, in Fairfield, will open its doors to the public. Constructing a library in the Cordelia and Lower Green Valley area of Fairfield was identified as a top priority in the Solano County Library's 20-year Facilities Master Plan that was developed in 2000 and was also listed as a top priority of the citizens in the area. The new library will provide access to the residents of the Cordelia and Green Valley areas of Fairfield, which due to their location and traffic conditions are far removed from convenient library access. The two-story, building will provide a civic presence that includes a library and city offices for residents in the area. The City of Fairfield partnered with the County of Solano and the State, to build the $14.5 million, two-story 29,000 square foot facility. As the lead agency, the City of Fairfield will be the owner of the facility and the County of Solano through the Solano County Library will provide library services. The Solano County Library's mission statement reads: The Solano County Library offers professional, innovative, cost-effective service by providing library materials, resources, information, entertainment and life long learning opportunities to enrich the lives of the people of Solano County. The City of Fairfield will continue to partner with the Fairfield- Suisun Unified School District, Solano County Office of Education, and Friends of the Fairfield and Suisun Community Libraries to provide educational services the library and meet the goals as envisioned by the Solano County Library. As the citizens of Fairfield open their new library, I would like to recognize the City of Fairfield and their partners for this achievement and extend my congratulations.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Suisun City mayor, Jim Spering, who after serving 20 years as the mayor of Suisun City will be stepping down to assume his newly elected position as the Solano County supervisor for District Three in January. Under the leadership of Jim Spering, the city of Suisun constructed a new city hall on the waterfront, symbolizing Suisun City's transformation from what the San Francisco Chronicle rated as ``the worst city to live in'' to what is now considered a jewel on the water. City hall, which for many years was located in a trailer, was ``the only city hall in California that was registered with the Department of Motor Vehicles.'' The city now contains some of the best public spaces in the county, has a vibrant downtown, the quality of housing has improved tremendously, and the city's crime rate has dropped dramatically. Similar to Billy Beane, the general manager of his favorite team, the Oakland Athletics, Jim has been creative in finding innovative solutions during times of fiscal stress. In addition to his leadership position on the Suisun City council, Jim Spering has assumed a leadership role on regional transportation issues. This has earned him the reputation as Solano County's ``go to guy'' on transportation matters. Jim Spering has been past chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the 9-county San Francisco Bay area region and is currently on the board. At the MTC, Jim helped found the Transportation for Livable Communities Program which provides incentives for pedestrian and transit-oriented developments that strengthen the link between transportation, land use and community goals. Jim Spering has also represented Suisun City or Solano County on several boards and commissions including the City Housing Authority, the Solano Transportation Authority, and District, and Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Board. Jim has been a tremendous asset to the city of Suisun and Solano County as one of their most experienced and valued mayors. His efforts earned for him the high esteem of his associates and the appreciation of the public. As Jim Spering steps down as mayor of Suisun City, I would like to thank him and his wife Pam for their commitment and service to the community of Suisun City. I wish Jim the best of luck in his new leadership role on the Solano County board of supervisors.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 100th birthday of a woman who is not only an example of strength to her family, but to all of us as well. Born in Hartville, OH, December 11, 1906, Letha was the second-born of 10 children to Alvin and Jesse Adams. The family of 12 resided in Ohio until 1915, when they moved west, on what she describes as ``a very long train ride.'' The family settled on a farm in French Camp, just outside of Stockton, CA. Letha married Wilfred Cannon in 1928. They raised two children, Ruth and Wilfred, Jr., in the Stockton area. After Wilfred passed away, Letha persevered, and even began a new career as a nurse. She spent 11 years at St. Joseph's Hospital. In addition to her roles as a nurturing mother and nurse, Letha has made time for her community. She has been active in the PTA, Grange, Escalon Presbyterian Church, French Camp Vaqueros, and Dixon Community Church. As if her plate was not full enough, Letha is a prize-winning gardener. Her African Violets took first place at the Dixon May Fair. Letha also takes pleasure in travel. Even at her age, in the past year, she has flown across the country to New Jersey and Wisconsin. Letha is blessed with 5 surviving siblings, 2 children, 8 grandchildren, 17 great grandchildren, and 29 nieces and nephews. Her family and friends have gathered together to celebrate her remarkable age of 100 and to thank her for being their ``foster mom,'' as many fondly call her. Letha Adams Cannon has spent her life enjoying travel, gardening, and most of all, her family. I wish Letha and her family the best on this momentous occasion.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, please let me thank my colleague, Mr. McNulty, for his great leadership and my distinguished colleague from Minnesota, Mr. Ramstad, for his friendship and leadership, too. Mr. Speaker, I rise in really strong support of the Innocent Spouse Protection Act. Along with my great friend and colleague Senator Feinstein of California, I introduced this legislation because I believe that it will provide a straightforward solution to the unfair treatment of innocent spouses under the current law. Under the current Tax Code, the IRS may relieve an innocent spouse of liability for unpaid taxes if it would be unfair to hold that spouse responsible. No recourse exists, however, to prevent the IRS from seizing assets or garnishing wages if relief is not approved. The story of one Californian provides an example of the problem. The IRS seized all of her husband's income to pay a tax liability incurred 20 years earlier, very long before they were married, which is clearly not the responsibility of this spouse. But because the IRS seized all of the income, the taxes on the income remained unpaid and, as you can imagine, the ball keeps rolling along. When this woman's spouse died, the IRS pursued the innocent spouse for the taxes on her deceased husband's income. Along rolls the ball. She was forced to then sell her family home and all of her property owned jointly with her husband. In fact, the IRS may have her wages garnished along with funds set aside for her in a trust by a probate court in a completely unrelated family matter. Recent decisions by the Eighth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have denied the tax court jurisdiction over petitions for equitable relief. Consequently, there are no mechanisms for review or appeal of these IRS decisions. The aim of this legislation is to provide an avenue through which these decisions may be appealed. This bill in no way guarantees relief, but rather fixes the broken appeals process for these IRS decisions. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this small change that is supported by my colleagues on the Ways and Means Committee that will have a profound effect on the lives of many innocent spouses who deserve their day in court.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his leadership. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Democratic motion to instruct conferees on the SAFE Port Act. The Republican leadership has failed to fix the Department of Homeland Security's grant system which just this week failed to provide the port of Oakland in California, the fourth busiest port in the country in the heart of the Bay Area, with any money at all to protect this vital national security and economic security asset. The most recent round of port security grant awards demonstrates the agencies' continued ignorance of the security needs of our Nation's ports, and the lack of a credible threat assessment by which to award funds. Of course, should we be surprised? This is the same agency that identified Old McDonald's Petting Zoo as a vulnerable national asset, but left the Empire State Building off the list as a logical target in need of funding support. We cannot do enough to protect our critical infrastructure in the United States; but without Ranking Member Thompson's motion to instruct, we will be leaving glaring vulnerabilities in our rail, subway, bus, and trucking systems. The Republican leadership has had many opportunities to address these issues, separate and apart from ports legislation, but it has failed to take our Nation's domestic security seriously. Today, through the motion to instruct, the House has the ability to show our absolute commitment to the safety and security of Americans who use our Nation's vital transportation systems. We should follow the leadership of the other body to secure our Nation's rail and transit systems, strengthen aviation security, secure the border, create a national warning and alert system, and provide first responders with post-disaster health monitoring. By supporting the Democratic motion to instruct conferees, we will get it right; and we will instruct the conferees to accept the Senate positions on these important issues. We should not let this opportunity to do better, to strengthen security, and assist first responders pass us by. Please support the Democratic motion to instruct.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear: I believe that there is a special place in hell reserved for the planners and perpetrators of 9/11. But 5 years after 9/11, we have yet to hold and try one single terrorist accountable. And sadly, today we have before us a bill that, if passed in its current form, will do nothing but put us in further legal limbo, further delaying punishment for these terrorists. We need clear legislation and swift, tough and fair justice to be sure that we don't observe another 9/11 anniversary without these terrorists punished. How do we go about that? Well, I can tell you that we don't do it by passing this bill. We need a bill that is not going to be turned over by the Supreme Court, a bill that is clear about our commitment in the United States to common article 3 and to the kind of rule of law and the law of war that will be sure that these perpetrators of 9/11 and others meet justice and do it quickly. Right now, we have before us a bill that the Republicans pretty much negotiated among themselves that allows the President to redefine torture when and how he sees fit, and will put our armed services at risk for abuse if they are ever captured while doing little to obtain the intelligence we need from captured terrorists. That is why so many retired generals, JAG officers and senior military experts oppose the President's plan and say very clearly that we must not go down this road that will put our troops in danger. The former chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Shalikashvili, and over 40 former military officers and Pentagon officials, wrote recently that the Geneva Conventions are currently the only source of legal protection for many of our troops deployed in harm's way throughout the world. That is why my amendment that was not approved by the Rules Committee is an important opportunity to get this right. We do have to do this now. It is important to do it now. But we cannot rush to judgment and get it wrong again. Keep in mind the President's original plan has not given us the ability to prosecute anyone because they got it wrong. And because they blew it, and are about to blow it again, we are still not going to be able to bring the 9/11 perpetrators to justice, which is what we want to do. Ladies and gentlemen, please support a ``no'' vote on the previous question so we can amend this bill, do the right thing, and get a bill that we can bring to the President to sign soon.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Chief Mark Moczulski who is retiring from the city of Antioch Police Department after 29 years of serving Antioch and the entire region. Mark Moczulski began his distinguished career with the city of Antioch Police Department in 1977. In 1985, he was promoted to police corporal, and in 1987 received the ranking of sergeant. Three years later he became a lieutenant, and in 1996, he was promoted to captain. In 2000, Mark Moczulski was promoted to police chief for the city of Antioch. As chief, he has been instrumental in helping the police department expand in size and quality of service and supporting community-wide efforts to maintain a high quality of life for city of Antioch residents during the region's punctuated growth. During his tenure, Chief Moczulski oversaw the completion of several projects to support the department's expansion. Some of these accomplishments include managing the completion of the build-out of the police department's main facility and the establishment of a sub- station at the Prewett Family Water Park. As Chief, Mark Moczulski was also responsible for several technology improvement projects including the implementation of a new state-of- the-art information and records system as well as acquiring important safety equipment including portable radios for all officers and automated external defibrillators. These expansion projects were important for the police department and even more invaluable for residents of the Antioch community, who now receive more value-added police services than ever before. Chief Moczulski also worked to improve the quality of department services during his tenure at the Antioch Police Department. His work included the creation of a professional standards and training bureau as well as the development of a continuous testing process for hiring new employees. As a resident of Antioch with his wife Robin, Mark Moczulski is both a member and leader of the community. Mark has one daughter, Jennifer, who is 24 and a son, Eric, who is 24. For 29 years, Chief Moczulski has served the Antioch Police Department and surrounding community. His hard work has improved the safety of the city and the community as a whole, and has ensured an enduring legacy of public service in Antioch. Today, I am proud to commend him for his service to the community, his dedication to duty and his commitment to the people of Antioch.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Berman for his hard work with me on this issue. I commend Chairman Hyde, for whom I have tremendous affection, for having this bill named after him. Mr. Chairman, the amendment that Mr. Berman and I are offering is the single strongest step Congress can take to ensure that the civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with India does not lead to a nuclear arms race in South Asia. Our amendment would allow exports of nuclear reactors and other technology to India, our good friend. But it would prevent the export of nuclear reactor fuel until India has ceased production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons. The United States and the other original nuclear weapons states have all agreed to a voluntary moratorium on fissile material production. But under the bill as currently written, India will receive all of the benefits of a nuclear state under the nonproliferation treaty without being obligated to halt the production of fissile material, without having to sign a comprehensive test ban treaty, or to take other steps toward disarmament. Requiring that India commit to ceasing the production of bomb material, in exchange for all of the benefits of nuclear trade, without asking for it to take any other responsibilities of a nuclear power is the bare minimum we should require to improve United States' national security. The bill before us makes drastic exceptions to established nonproliferation rules. Currently India's production of weapons-grade plutonium is constrained by the requirements of its nuclear power reactors and its limited supply of natural uranium. But the civil- military separation plan offered by India excludes from national international inspection military facilities and spent fuel. This provides India with a substantial capability to increase its nuclear weapons arsenal. If the bill goes ahead as is, the foreign supply of nuclear fuel to India would free up their existing limited capacity of highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons. It is therefore responsible and prudent for Congress to ensure through this legislation that as a simple price of having access to sensitive nuclear technology, India declare a moratorium on productions of fissile material, just as the U.S. and other nuclear powers have. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize City of Fairfield resident Dr. (Colonel) Leroy Johnson, Pastor, for his dedication and commitment to his church and community. Dr. Johnson, who was licensed to preach in 1952, has served the Missionary Temple C.M.E. Church since 1989. Prior to joining the C.M.E. Church, Dr. Johnson was president of Miles College, which has a proud history of producing teachers, preachers, community leaders and politicians, in Birmingham, AL. In 1963, Dr. Johnson entered the U.S. Army Chaplain Corps where he held various assignments which included pastoring the largest Protestant military/civilian congregation in Western Europe. During his pastorate in Kaiserslautern, West Germany, the gospel singers and services that exist on all American military posts, bases, stations, and ships today were created. He was the first African American to receive a line officer's commission under the Navy Reserve Officer Candidate Program and had the distinction of being a member of the Navy's first atomic bomb testing team in the South Pacific Marshall Islands. After serving in the U.S. Army and Navy during a career that included world conflicts such as the Korean War and Vietnam, Dr. Johnson retired with the rank of Colonel. Included amongst his 25 military awards and decorations are the Legion of Merit, Bronze Star, Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal and the Navy Unit Citation. Dr. Johnson holds a Ph.D. from Kansas State University and has attained three masters degrees from Chapman University. As the officers and members of Missionary Temple C.M.E. Church pay tribute to Dr. Johnson during the ``This is your Life'' Celebration, I wish Dr. Johnson, his wife, Simmie Mae, and daughter, Leana, many more years of health and happiness.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Alicia Hollowell, a Suisun City resident and Fairfield High School graduate for her outstanding performance as a pitcher for the Arizona Wildcats. Ms. Hollowell was born on February 29, 1984 to Doug and Suzanne Hollowell of Suisun City. On June 6, 2006, Ms. Hollowell struck out 13 batters, while pitching a complete game in Arizona's 5-0 victory over Northwestern giving Arizona the 2006 NCAA Women's Softball Championship. For her efforts she was named the College World Series Most Outstanding Player. Arizona's championship caps off a stellar collegiate career. During Ms. Hollowell's 4 years at Arizona, she compiled a 144 win 23 loss record with a minuscule earned run average under 0.90. In addition she struck out over 1700 batters. Success is nothing new for Ms. Hollowell. While attending Fairfield High School she received the Gatorade Player of the Year award which is considered by many as the most Prestigious High School Athletic Award. She left Fairfield High as the recordholder for strikeouts in a season, strikeouts in a career, and most wins in a career. A true testament of her will to win was her 61 strikeout performance in a 30 inning game. On June 19, 2006, another of Ms. Hollowell's goals was fulfilled when she was named for the second straight year to the USA Softball Women's National Team where she will be competing for her second straight International Softball Federation World Championship in China. As Alicia moves to the next phase of her life I wish her continued success. I know she will continue to represent the United States well.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the exceptional value of Charlie Beck's 36 years of dedicated service to the citizens of Fairfield. After graduating from Sacramento State College in 1970, Charlie was hired by the City of Fairfield as a Junior Civil Engineer and in 1972 became the City's first Traffic Engineer. Two years later Charlie moved to the Corporation Yard to become the Manager of Street, Drainage, Signs, Traffic Signals, and Equipment Maintenance Division. In 1980 Mr. Beck became the City's first Assistant Public Works Director and in 1985 added City Engineer to his title. Under this position Charlie was responsible for the management of Development Review, Engineering Design, Capital Improvement Projects, Traffic Engineering, and Public Works and Building Inspections. In 2000, Mr. Beck was appointed to the position of Director of Public Works for the City of Fairfield. Under his supervision, he managed 190 Public Works employees, including Engineers, Technicians, Inspectors, Maintenance Personnel, and Support Staff. Mr. Beck's attitude of ``doing it right the first time'' and ``build it to stand the test of time'' has served the City of Fairfield well in the past and will serve the City well into the future. A long-term retired employee said it best when he referred to Charlie's knowledge of masonry which he learned from his father. He said that with every action Charlie took since he started employment with the city, he placed each brick and made sure it was level before moving on to the next one. With that approach, he built a great foundation for the city. He is recognized by his co-workers as a model of integrity and a great mentor. Mr. Beck's wisdom and office presence will truly be missed. Charlie Beck has spent his entire career working for his community and for the citizens of Fairfield. As he enters retirement I would like to wish Charlie, his wife Joyce, and his family many wonderful years of happiness, prosperity, and good health.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I think many of us find ourselves deeply distressed that we are here to talk about a so- called week about the war on terrorism when we were promised months ago by the majority leader a debate on Iraq. There is a convergence here of themes that have been deeply disappointing to me for well over the last 2 years, as I saw the administration begin to use terms like the ``global war on terror'' to begin to cover for what has clearly been a mistake in Iraq. I am here tonight because I believe it is high time for a change of direction in Iraq. I honor the sacrifice of our fighting men and women and their families. With 2,498 American deaths in Iraq today since the beginning of the military operations, it is time that the Bush administration finally levels with the American people. I think we first have to go back to where, the beginning, to when, after the September 11 attacks and after this House, Democrats, Republicans, along with the Senate and the American people, agreed that we had to topple the government, the Taliban government in Afghanistan that had harbored the al Qaeda terrorists that had attacked us on September 11. And after we took that government out and began to move that operation toward, hopefully, a successful Afghanistan, we began to hear the drumbeat of talk out of the administration that Iraq was a big threat to us, that we had mushroom clouds in our future, that this was a country with a leader in Saddam Hussein who was an imminent threat to the United States. Many of us in the post-September 11 time believed that we had to do something more than just fly flights over Iraq and deal with those issues that we had to really move and to do things to create the kind of coalition of not only the willing but the capable that we had when George Bush's father went after Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war. The real issue right now is what have we done in Iraq to make sure that we can actually succeed. And I think that what we have, unfortunately, has been a number of mistakes by the civilian leadership in the Pentagon. We have heard them all before. The litany is long and getting longer. It begins with not really understanding the context of Iraq. It begins with not really understanding that we needed more troops on the ground after we took Saddam Hussein's government down than we actually need to do the taking down of the government. It began with not really understanding the context and the construct of those, the sects in Iraq and the enmity and the fear and the kind of reprisals that you would see if the Sunni minority that had been in power during the Saddam time actually had the Shiia come back into power and realized how badly they had been treated for 25 years. We have had multiple governments in Iraq, and this mission has morphed and constantly been redefined by the administration to fit the latest catastrophe. What I really hope we can do over the next few days is have a Democratic position begin to emerge. Our friends on the other side like to talk about truth. And Daniel Patrick Moynihan did have that great saying about people can have their own opinion, but they can't have their own set of facts. Well, my grandmother from Ireland used to tell me that saying it doesn't make it so. And what is really clear is that we have to have a movement forward by this administration to not only admit the mistakes that have been made, but to be sure that we actually can bring our troops home sooner and safer. We want to honor the sacrifice of our troops, but at the same time we want to bring them home sooner and safer. I am happy to yield to my colleague from New Jersey who is going to continue this conversation, Mr. Andrews.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Mr. Hobson and Ranking Member Visclosky for offering a strong bill that ensures that the United States maintains a robust nuclear deterrent and modernizes the infrastructure to support it. I am especially pleased that the bill continues the House's unwavering support for the National Ignition Facility, NIF at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory in my district with full funding. As you know, NIF is one-of-a-kind world-class scientific effort that allows the United States to maintain its nuclear arsenal without resorting to underground testing. Also NIF significantly advances the science of fusion as a potential alternate energy source. I would like to also commend the chairman on a bill which fully funds the National Nuclear Security Administration's Advanced Simulation and Computing Program, ASC, which has developed the fastest computer in the world. ASC is vital to the transformation of the Nation's nuclear infrastructure and its simulations will help assess new programs such as the Reliable Replacement Warhead Program, RRW. Livermore Lab is at the forefront of this work and I welcome the continued investment in computational capabilities, like the Blue Gene L and Purple computers at Livermore Lab, and the unparalleled capabilities they provide. Again I commend the chairman for a strong mark.

Mrs. TAUSCHER

Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleague, Representative George Miller, to pay tribute to County Connection, the public bus system provider that serves more than a dozen communities and unincorporated areas of central Contra Costa County in our two Congressional Districts. County Connection was founded on March 27, 1980 under a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement. After several years of careful planning, locally elected officials in Central Contra Costa recognized the need for a truly coordinated and integrated regional transit system. County Connection began providing service with 12 buses, carrying 1,950,000 passengers, traveling 1,423,357 miles. In just its first ten years, the agency multiplied its fleet of buses ten fold. Today, the transportation agency maintains a current fleet of 131 buses and 56 LINK vans, makes nearly 5,000,000 fixed-route and paratransit trips throughout central Contra Costa and provides 4.5 million rides annually. The system is now overseen by an 11-member Board of Directors, one representative from each jurisdiction and one representative for the unincorporated areas of Central County. Since its establishment, County Connection has received numerous prestigious awards including; the American Public Transit Association (APTA) Minority & Women Advancement Award for its meritorious accomplishments in the employment, promotion and training of minorities and women in management positions, and this year, the California Water Environment Association recognized the agency with its ``Facility of the Year'' award in recognition for going above and beyond normal efforts to protect susceptible plant and wildlife that survive in local streams. For 25 years, County Connection has provided vital transportation services to residents throughout Central Contra Costa. As the population of this County grows, the services provided by County Connection have never been needed more. Each day agency buses help people get to their work, return home, and in general provide a service that no other program in the community can. Today, we are proud to commend County Connection for the agency's service to the community and its lasting commitment to the people of Contra Costa County.