Mark Udall

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I am today introducing a bill to permit Ms. Betty Dick to continue her use and occupancy of a house located within Rocky Mountain National Park. The bill is cosponsored by my Colorado colleague, Representative Tancredo. I greatly appreciate his support. The purpose is to allow an 82-year-old Grand County grandmother to continue to live in this house for the rest of her life, as she has done for 25 years under a legal agreement between her late husband and the National Park Service. That agreement ends on July 16 of this year. Without this bill or a new agreement with the National Park Service, at that time Ms. Dick, who has been a good neighbor with the National Park and who has opened her home for community events, will be evicted from this property. Such an eviction is neither necessary nor desirable. Ms. Dick has been a good neighbor, has taken good care of the property and has not created management or administrative problems for the National Park Service in the years she has lived on this property. She should be allowed to continue to live on this property and continue to contribute to the National Park and the surrounding community. I had hoped that Ms. Dick and the Interior Department could work out a resolution to this issue so that she could remain on her property. Last year I asked Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton to help make that happen. But the response--from the Director of the National Park Service's Intermountain Region--was that the Interior Department is ``legally bound to honor the provisions of the [1980] settlement agreement'' and that the furthest the Department would go would be to offer Ms. Dick ``the opportunity to remain on the property for the entire summer of 2005,'' an offer that evidently she has declined. Ms. Dick needs to have a resolution to this issue as soon as possible--she needs to know by this spring whether she has to start packing her things and move out, or arrange to do some maintenance on the property if she is allowed to stay. I am not convinced that the Interior Department lacks the authority to resolve this matter by entering into a new agreement with Ms. Dick. But in any event, my bill would settle that question. Since I first raised this matter with the Interior Department, I have been impressed with the outpouring of support from the nearby communities of Grand Lake and Granby, Colorado. The people in these communities have expressed a strong desire to have Ms. Dick remain on this property and be a part of their community. That is the purpose of this bill. For the information of our colleagues, I am attaching background information and an outline of the bill: Background Prior to their divorce, a married couple, Fred Dick and Marilyn Dick, owned as tenants in common a tract of land within the boundaries of Rocky Mountain National Park that included the property covered by the bill. When Fred and Marilyn Dick were divorced, Marilyn Dick became the sole owner of the tract, but Fred Dick retained the right of first refusal to acquire it if Marilyn Dick ever chose to sell it. In 1977, Marilyn Dick sold the tract to the United States for addition to Rocky Mountain National Park, but Fred Dick, asserting his right of first refusal, sued to cancel the transaction. In 1980, that lawsuit was settled through an agreement between the National Park Service and Mr. Dick and his heirs, successors and assigns. Under the settlement agreement, Mr. Dick and his new wife, Ms. Betty Dick, were allowed to lease and occupy the 23 acres comprising the property identified in section 2(b) for 25 years. Mr. Dick died in 1992, but Betty Dick has continued to lease and occupy the property identified in section 2(b) under the terms of the settlement agreement. Betty Dick's right to lease and occupy the property will expire on July 16, 2005, at which time Ms. Dick will have attained the age of 83 years. She wishes to continue to occupy the property for the remainder of her life, and has sought to conclude a new agreement with the National Park Service that would permit her to do so. However, the Park Service has not been willing to agree to such an arrangement and is demanding that she vacate the property by July 16, 2005. Since 1980, Betty Dick has consistently occupied the property as a summer residence and has made it available for community events. During that period, she has been a good steward of the property. Her occupancy has not been detrimental to the resources and values of Rocky Mountain National Park and has not created problems for the National Park Service or the public. Purpose of the Bill The legislation reflects the fact that it is appropriate for Betty Dick to be permitted to continue her occupancy of the property covered by the bill or the remainder of her natural life under the terms and conditions applicable to such occupancy since 1980. The purpose of the bill is to require the Secretary of the Interior to permit this. Outline of the Bill Section 1 provides a short title, sets forth findings regarding background information and states the purpose of the legislation. Section 2 has four subsections-- Subsection 2(a) would require the Secretary of the Interior to permit continued use and occupancy of property described in subsection (b) by Betty Dick for the remainder of her natural life, subject to the requirements of the bill. Subsection 2(b) identifies the property covered by the bill through an appropriate map reference. Subsection 2(c) provides that Ms. Dick's occupancy and use of the property covered by the bill is to be subject to the same terms and conditions as have applied to such use and occupancy under the 1980 agreement between the National Park Service and Ms. Dick's late husband, except that Ms. Dick is to make annual rental payments equivalent to \1/25\th of the up-front amount that the agreement required to be paid to the National Park Service in 1980. Subsection (d) states that nothing in the bill is to be construed as permitting construction of any new structure on the property covered by the bill and that nothing in the bill would apply to occupancy or use of the property by anyone except Betty Dick.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, today I am again introducing the Environmental Justice Act. I am proud that Congresswoman Hilda Solis and Representative Rob Andrews are joining me as original cosponsors of this bill. Representative Solis and I introduced a similar bill in the 108th Congress. Reintroduction of the bill reflects continued concern about the way federal actions have had disproportionately adverse effects on the health, environment and quality of life of Americans in minority and lower-income communities. Too often these communities--because of their low income or lack of political visibility--are exposed to greater risks from toxins and dangerous substances because it has been possible to locate waste dumps, industrial facilities, and chemical storage warehouses in these communities with less care than would be taken in other locations. The sad fact is that in some eyes these communities have appeared as expendable--without full appreciation that human beings, who deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, are living, working, and raising families there. This needs to give way to policies focused on providing clean, healthy and quality environments within and around these communities. When that happens, we provide hope for the future and enhance the opportunities that these citizens have to improve their condition. Our bill would help do just that. The bill essentially codifies an Executive Order that was issued by President Clinton in 1994. That order required all federal agencies to incorporate environmental justice considerations in their missions, develop strategies to address disproportionate impacts to minority and low-income people from their activities, and coordinate the development of data and research on these topics. Although federal agencies have been working to implement this order and have developed strategies, there is clearly much more to do. We simply cannot solve these issues overnight or even over a couple of years. We need to ``institutionalize'' the consideration of these issues in a more long-term fashion--which this bill would do. In addition, just as the current policy was established by an administrative order, it could be swept away with a stroke of an administrative pen. To avoid that, we need to make it more permanent-- which is also what this bill would do. It would do this by statutorily requiring all federal agencies to-- make addressing environmental justice concerns part of their missions; develop environmental justice strategies; evaluate the effects of proposed actions on the health and environment of minority, low income, and Native American communities; avoid creating disproportionate adverse impacts on the health or environment of minority, low-income, or Native American communities; and collect data and carry out research on the effects of facilities on health and environment of minority, low-income, and Native American communities. It would also statutorily establish two committees: The Interagency Environmental Justice Working Group, set up by the Executive Order to develop strategies, provide guidance, coordinate research, convene public meetings, and conduct inquires regarding environmental justice issues; and A Federal Environmental Justice Advisory Committee, appointed by the President, including members of community-based groups, business, academic, state agencies and environmental organizations. It will provide input and advice to the Interagency Working Group. In a nutshell, what this bill would do is require federal agencies that control the siting and disposing of hazardous materials, store toxins or release pollutants at federal facilities, or issue permits for these kinds of activities to make sure they give fair treatment to low-income and minority populations--including Native Americans. The bill tells federal agencies, ``In the past these communities have endured a disproportionate impact to their health and environment. Now we must find ways to make sure that won't be the case in the future.'' For the information of our colleagues, here is a short analysis of the bill:

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Remote Sensing Applications Act of 2005. I introduced this bill as H.R. 2426 in the 107th Congress, and the House passed it in 2002. The bill was introduced again in the 108th Congress as H.R. 1292, and passed the full Science Committee. In this Congress, I'm eager to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to see my legislation through to passage in both chambers. I originally introduced this bill mainly to address a real problem we have in Colorado, the problem of excess growth and sprawl. My goal was to point to a way to utilize the resources of the Federal Government to help foster wise community planning and management at the local level. As a Member of the House Science Committee and the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, it made sense to me to look for ways to help communities grow in a smarter way through the use of technology. I have reintroduced the bill in this Congress because I still believe we need to do more to promote geospatial technology. Geospatial data from satellites can produce very accurate maps that show information about vegetation, wildlife habitat, flood plains, transportation corridors, soil types, and many other things. By giving State and local governments and communities greater access to geospatial data from commercial sources and Federal agencies such as NASA, I believe that the Federal Government can help bring valuable-- and powerful--informational planning resources to the table. My bill would facilitate this transfer of information. The bill would establish in NASA a program of grants for competitively awarded pilot projects. The purpose would be to explore the integrated use of sources of remote sensing and other geospatial information to address State, local, regional, and tribal agency needs. State and local governments and communities can use geospatial information in a variety of applications--in such areas as urban land- use planning, coastal zone management and erosion control, transportation corridors, environmental planning, and agricultural and forest management. But another potential application that has garnered much recent attention is the use of geospatial technology to bolster our homeland security. Emergency management has always been an important responsibility of State and local governments. But in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks, the scope of this responsibility has broadened. Geospatial technology can help States and localities identify the location, nature, and scope of potential vulnerabilities and the impact of potential hazards, as well as how to respond to events and recover from them. Certainly it is important that we continue to add to our database of available geospatial information--more information is always better than less. But we also need to get maximum use of information we already have at hand. That is the need this bill would address. State and local officials are becoming more familiar with the uses of geospatial technology for various planning purposes. However, there is a need for Federal agencies such as NASA, which has been pioneering the uses of satellite remote sensing technologies, to work with State and local organizations to demonstrate how remote sensing and other geospatial data can offer a cost effective planning and assessment tool. I'm pleased there has been broad bipartisan cosponsorship of the bill and that it has earned the endorsement of a number of important national organizations. These supporters of my bill understand the importance of targeting geospatial information at the places where it will have the greatest impact--the local and regional levels. The Remote Sensing Applications Act can help begin to bridge the gap between established and emerging technology solutions and the problems and challenges that State and local communities face regarding growth management, homeland security, forest fire management, and other issues. Mr. Speaker, this bill will be welcomed by States and localities nationwide. I look forward to working with Members of the House, including my colleagues on the Science Committee, to move forward with this important initiative.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, nearly two months ago this House passed a bill that failed to address many of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, while including objectional provisions regarding immigration, civil liberties, and other issues. While the Senate was able to reach agreement on a bill that reflected the views of both parties, the Commission, and the 9/11 families, House leaders did not work in a similarly bipartisan way to reach agreement on the best way to implement the recommendations. I voted for the House bill because I believe we need intelligence reform. I hoped that with the President supporting the Senate bill and every Republican in the Senate voting for it, the House Republicans' misguided criticisms of the bill wouldn't carry much weight in conference. So I am very pleased that the conference report we are voting on today more closely reflects the Senate bill. And I am encouraged that during this last week of the 108th Congress, we have come together to put country before politics--and to send legislation to the President that will make America safer.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I will support this resolution. But the fact we are considering it should be a source of embarrassment for our Republican colleagues and their leaders. The resolution would delete from the omnibus appropriations bill a provision that would put at risk the privacy of every American's income-tax return. The Senate passed the resolution after the discovery of that provision led the chairman of their Appropriations Committee to publicly apologize and after it was agreed that the appropriations bill itself would not be sent to the President until the deletion was made. Certainly this was an embarrassing development. But it should not have come as much of a surprise, because it was the result of a badly flawed process. Rolling together nine separate appropriations measures--including one that had not been considered by either chamber and several that had been considered only by the House--is not the way Congress should do its work. And, as in previous years, the Republican leadership made things outrageously worse by rushing the massive measure to the floor under a ``martial law'' rule that prevented Members from having time to carefully review its thousands of pages. That was the situation that faced us on November 20th, when the House took up the measure, and when each of us had to decide whether to support or oppose its passage. I finally decided to support it, but the decision was not an easy one and came only after as much review as my staff and I could give to the measure and after giving serious consideration to voting against it. On the one hand, a review of the measure showed that its enactment would have many benefits for Colorado and the country. For example, its enactment would assure that the cleanup of the Rocky Flats site would be able to stay on the schedule that aims for completion and closure by the beginning of 2006, and that there would be funds for much-needed work at the NIST laboratories in Boulder. It also would mean that the Interior Department could complete the purchase of the lands in the San Luis Valley that will become the new Baca National Wildlife Refuge adjoining the newly designated Great Sand Dunes National Park. It would mean that other Colorado lands could be added to the national forests, including more of the lands in the Beaver Brook watershed that the City of Golden is eager to sell for that purpose as well as the Miller tract near Grand Lake and other sensitive lands in other parts of the state. And it would provide other needed funds for ongoing work related to federal lands or other natural resources in our state being done by the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, it would provide funds for important projects for the benefit of many Colorado communities--including Boulder, Eldorado Springs, Idaho Springs, to mention only some in the Second Congressional District--and institutions, including National Jewish and Avista Hospitals, the Bonfils Blood Center, and the National Sports Center for the Disabled. Further, both our Nation's leadership in science and Colorado firms would benefit from the $291 million to be used by NASA for servicing the Hubble space telescope--which the statement of managers said ``should be one of NASA's highest priorities''--and from the bill's provision of $28.2 million for the space grant program. And I was encouraged by the amounts the bill would provide for renewable energy research and development--including $4.8 million for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) as well as an additional $6.7 for construction of NREL's Science and Technology facility--and for research regarding abrupt climate change. I wanted to support these provisions, particularly because many of them would not have been included in a long-term continuing resolution that was the most likely substitute if the omnibus bill did not pass. On the other hand, I was sure that any appropriations bill with such a large number of specifically-earmarked funds must include allocations for low priority projects or questionable purposes--something of particular concern when the federal government is operating in the red. Further, the conference report retained an objectionable provision that would allow virtually any health care entity to refuse to provide, cover, pay for, or even refer patients for abortion services, even when such actions are otherwise legally mandated by the federal or a state government. The same provision also would allow health care providers who receive public money to refuse to provide women with unintended pregnancies information concerning all their legal options. I thought this provision should not have been included. In another problematic provision, the bill cuts funding for NREL's photovoltaics program, which could mean a loss of as many as 40 jobs at NREL. This would be a devastating loss for the development of PV technology, for NREL overall, and for Colorado. And I was very concerned that there was a distinct possibility that by voting for the bill I would be supporting other new legislation whose specific details--and possibly objectionable features--I would only be apparent if there were more adequate time to review the bill. The fact that the bill included the tax-return provision addressed by the resolution before us today shows this concern was well-founded. And I would have been even more apprehensive if I had known that the statement of managers not only failed to fully explain many provisions, but in some instances was completely silent about important parts of the bill. For example, the statement of managers omitted any mention of the fact that the bill included legislation for a full decade's extension of the recreation-fee demonstration program--legislation that I had opposed when it was considered by the Resources Committee and that in my opinion should not have been a part of any appropriations bill. Finally, after as careful a review as possible under the circumstances and after weighing the decision carefully, I decided to vote for the omnibus bill despite the defects that I recognized and likelihood that there were others I had not found. I will stand by that vote. The decision was mine and I recognize that I am accountable to my constituents for it. But I object to the circumstances under which that vote was cast--and my objections have only become stronger in the time between that vote and the one that we will cast on the resolution to remedy one--but hardly all--of the omnibus bill's flaws.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Men's and Women's Cross Country Teams of the University of Colorado for claiming the NCAA National Championship titles on November 22, 2004. While the University of Colorado has won the title for both teams before, the men's squad in 2001 and the women's team in 2000, never before have teams of the university claimed both titles in the same year. In fact, this remarkable feat has happened only four times in NCAA cross country history. Both teams achieved their goal of winning the national championship by all five of the female runners finishing in the top thirty, and all five of the male runners in the top fifty. These athletes are the epitome of dedication and hard work. I join the University of Colorado in taking pride in this noteworthy accomplishment. Mr. Speaker, I commend these student athletes and ask all our colleagues to join me in congratulating the University of Colorado Men's and Women's Cross Country Team on their National Championships.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I have used this forum from time to time to acknowledge the bipartisan public service of many distinguished Coloradans. Today I rise in what I hope will be a moment my Republican friends and colleagues will not begrudge--to honor a distinguished Coloradan who is anything but bipartisan. I rise to acknowledge Rick Ridder. Rick has been a trusted advisor and friend throughout my career in politics. Although Rick is respected and widely sought after in Colorado politics, he has never lost his down-to-earth nature. This is because he is the rarest of political partisans--a determined strategist who keeps his humanity intact. He understands the game of politics well and he most certainly plays to win. At the same time he is unwavering in his integrity and his sincere desire to work for the betterment of people. Rick has never been particularly impressed with the ``glitter'' of politics that attracts so many to our profession. Rather, he believes at his core in the importance of our democracy and his duty to fight for its vitality. This should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with his upbringing. By way of example, his mother took him to an Adlai Stevenson rally at the age of three. To occupy her little boy, she suggested that he pass out flyers promoting the Illinois Governor's bid for the presidency in 1956. In addition, having grown up in and around Washington, DC his playmates included the children of Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy. Whereas many of our generation looked at those men as heroes and even icons of a generation, Rick saw them simply as his friends' dads. Had he a different character this upbringing might have led Rick to a sense of entitlement, but instead, it gave him a razor sharp sense of purpose. He uses his unique experience in politics to serve a goal greater than his own self-interest. He has worked tirelessly to that effect for decades. In 1982, he helped Colorado Governor Richard Lamm with his third gubernatorial campaign. He went on to become the National Field Director for Gary Hart's 1984 presidential campaign. In 1985 with his wife Joan, he formed Ridder-Braden Inc., a political consulting and polling firm that has been instrumental in crafting campaigns in Colorado and across the country. His clients have included Colorado Governor Roy Romer, Congressman David Skaggs, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell and various Members of Congress. In 2004 he helped launch the meteoric rise of Governor Howard Dean, and a provocative ballot initiative on reform of the Electoral College that made a significant contribution to the public debate on a largely over-looked, but critical, component of our democratic process. While many political consultants are rightly maligned as ``hired guns'' who corrode public confidence in the political process, professionals like Rick Ridder and Joanie Braden are rare examples of people who work to elevate public discourse and improve our democracy. For the information of my colleagues I'm attaching the original article. [From the Rocky Mountain News, Oct. 29, 2004] Consultant Ridder Says Measure Is About Stronger Democracy (By James B. Meadow) Joanie Braden was deep into labor, nearing the delivery of her child, when she noticed something that years later would strike her as both odd and normal. Right next to her bed, there was her husband, the father of the child, diligently checking his wristwatch so he could time the intervals between contractions. And, simultaneously, right next to her bed, the same man was diligently talking long-distance on the phone, processing voter pattern information from key precincts in the 1984 Oregon presidential primary. ``As Rick was doing that,'' says Braden, laughing, ``I remember him acting as if it was the most natural thing in the world. He was there for me; he was there for the campaign.'' Happily, both labors--natal and political--paid off for Rick Ridder. Nathaniel Ridder arrived pink and healthy; Gary Hart took Oregon. Given this, it's no surprise to learn that ``Rick absolutely loves politics . . . he lives and breathes politics.'' At least that's the opinion of Tom Strickland, who hired Ridder for his two cracks at one of Colorado's U.S. Senate seats. Although Strickland came away 0-for-2, his respect for Ridder remains resolute. ``Rick has a gifted political mind,'' says Strickland. ``He may be very understated and unassuming--he's like a political version of Columbo, lulling you into thinking he's not following you--but he's really a couple of steps ahead all the time.'' He better be. As Election Day draws closer, Ridder's campaign for Amendment 36 is taking on water. The controversial measure, which would revamp Colorado's electoral votes system, replacing the current winner-take-all setup with one that awards the electoral votes proportionally, based on popular vote, has drawn national attention. Republicans have decried it as a not-so-sneaky way to siphon votes from George W. Bush. Not all Democrats are for it, either. And 36's proponents? Well, one of them claims it's more representative, makes everybody's vote count equally. Furthermore, ``It's the right thing to do in order to create a stronger democracy. The system we installed for democratic rule in Afghanistan did not include an Electoral College, did it?'' Those words come courtesy of Ridder, who's heading up the pro-36 fight. But words--to say nothing of a reported $700,000--might not be enough to win. Although Ridder's side was ahead early on, a Rocky Mountain News/News 4 poll released today shows the measure sinking 60-32. Those numbers prompted one political observer to refer to Amendment 36 as ``toast.'' Ridder's reaction to the new poll numbers was cautious. ``I think that one of the real issues that we're bringing forth in this campaign is the importance of making votes count--one person, one vote. And it is clear that we have started a debate on the issue, particularly on the Electoral College.'' Earlier, in a previous interview, he acknowledged his base optimism. ``You have to believe that change is possible and that what you fight for can come about.'' Although there is passion in his voice, it is tamed by a reflexive calm and control. He is 51, has thinning hair, and his 6-foot-1, 150-pound frame gives him a slightly Ichabod Crane air. A scion of the Knight-Ridder newspaper family, Victor Frank Ridder II was immersed in politics before, well, almost before he was tall enough to be immersed in anything. When he was 3, his mother was attending a rally for Adlai Stevenson. To occupy her son, she had him handing out leaflets for the Illinois governor who was bidding for the presidency in 1956. The political theme stayed strong in his life, perhaps in part because growing up in and around Washington, D.C., brought him into contact with playmates who were the children of Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy. After taking a year off between high school and college to toil on behalf of George McGovern's 1972 stab at the presidency, he returned to academe and graduated from Middlebury College in Vermont and earned a masters in broadcasting from Boston University. As he was getting ready to start his Ph.D. in communications, he decided instead to defer his studies and work on Hart's 1980 re-election as U.S. senator in Colorado. In 1982, he returned to Colorado to help with Richard Lamm's third gubernatorial campaign. He then became national field director for Hart's 1984 presidential campaign. By then, Braden and Ridder, married in 1981, had decided Colorado was the place to raise a family and were ensconced in Denver. In 1985, Ridder-Braden Inc., a political consulting and polling firm, was born. Over the years, Ridder compiled an impressive--and wholly Democratic--political resume. He worked on all three of Roy Romer's gubernatorial campaigns, as well as for numerous congressional candidates. Many campaigns later, in November 2002, Ridder surprised the political world when he took on the job of campaign manager for Howard Dean's fledgling presidential run. By April 2003, however, Ridder was gone from the campaign, a victim of infighting and his disinclination to work for a ``movement'' rather than a candidate. Although Ridder points to his leap of faith with the Dean campaign as proof that he takes chances, others aren't so sure. One competitor says that Ridder's strength has to do more with ``analysis behind the scenes'' than being a ``big picture guy or a risk taker.'' Ridder, unflappable as usual, takes the comments and criticisms in stride. He's not only heard the personal remarks before, he's aware of the digs against his profession. ``There is a wariness of the political consultant industry,'' he says. ``People don't like the perception that they're being manipulated.'' Ridder insists this isn't the case. As he once said, ``The best we can do is take the positive aspects of our candidate or cause and emphasize them. We can't take Adolf Hitler and make him Mahatma Gandhi.''

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5370 which will name the post office at 4985 Moorhead Ave in Boulder, Colorado the Donald G. Brotzman Post Office Building. Mr. Brotzman served in this body during the Vietnam War and the Nixon era. Even though our country was highly divided, he rose above partisan politics and reached across the aisle to work in a bipartisan manner. In my opinion, he was the kind of public official we and future Members of Congress can look to as an example. Born in Sterling, Colorado, Mr. Brotzman was an All Conference lineman at the University of Colorado in the 1930's. While attending CU-Boulder he joined the military and served as a first lieutenant with the 81st Infantry Division in the South Pacific. When he returned to the United States he finished his degree in both business and law and opened a law firm in Boulder, Colorado. Between 1945 and 1954 he served in both the Colorado State House of Representatives and Senate. In 1959 he was appointed by President Eisenhower as U.S. Attorney for Colorado. In 1963, as the nominee for the Republican Party, he was elected to serve the 2nd Congressional District of Colorado in the U.S. House of Representatives. During his 5 terms in office he served on the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee. He was instrumental in the passing of the Indian Peaks Wilderness Act, a national program to help runaway youth and establishing a tax credit for higher education expenses. He also helped shape the Clean Air Act and the Public Broadcasting Act. Mr. Brotzman was an early champion of stronger environmental oversight at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, and due to his efforts, the Johnson administration commissioned a scientific study which led to the eventual cleanup and closure of this site. He was also one of the first members to call for an all-volunteer army and the end of the draft during the Vietnam War. After serving in Congress, Mr. Brotzman was able to assist in the establishment of the all-volunteer army when he was named Assistant Secretary to the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs by President Ford. He served in this position for two years and explained his job as making ``the all- volunteer army work.'' In the Colorado State Legislature, Congress and two Republican Administrations, Mr. Brotzman served our country and Colorado well. His dedication to acting on his conscience and working on both sides of the aisle to better serve Colorado made him a leader in Congress. Donald Brotzman died in September at the age of 82. During his lifetime he admirably served both his country and the state of Colorado. I would like to thank my colleagues from Colorado for their support of this bill and Chairman Davis and Ranking Member Waxman of the Government Reform Committee as well as the leadership of the House for making it possible for the bill to be considered today. I urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Linda Shoemaker, an exceptional community leader in my district. Throughout her life, Linda has worked to improve the community in which she resides and to help those less fortunate than herself. In 2000, Linda and her husband, Steve, founded the Brett Family Foundation in Boulder, Colorado. The purpose of this foundation is to promote local nonprofits and policy initiatives that help disadvantaged youth around the state of Colorado. In 2001, Linda started the Bell Policy Center, a nonprofit organization which uses research to construct and promote public policy that focuses on the needs of working adults and families in Colorado. Linda's accomplishments are vast. In addition to taking on numerous leadership positions over the years, including becoming a Board Member and Sponsor of the I Have A Dream Foundation, where she worked to provide scholarships to students who would otherwise be unable to attend a college or university, Linda also volunteers time to help abused and neglected children in her community by volunteering as a Court Appointed Special Advocate. Linda has been recognized time and again for her tremendous work in the Boulder community, as well as around the state of Colorado. Most recently, Linda won the 2004 National Philanthropy Day in Colorado award for Outstanding Philanthropist. It is individuals like Linda, who take action at the community level and take the time to help those less fortunate than themselves that will make this country, and the world, a better place for generations to come. Mr. Speaker, I commend her accomplishments and ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Linda Shoemaker for her outstanding contributions to Colorado.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Glenn Porzak, a world-renowned mountain climber who has remained an active climber and contributor to the climbing community even into his 50s. Glenn has not only excelled at the physically challenging ascents of the world's tallest peaks, he has also developed a distinguished reputation as a staunch legal defender of his client's water rights as well as a contributing member of his community. Glenn recently returned to his home in Boulder, Colorado, from successfully reaching the summit of Cho Oyu, the world's sixth-highest peak in the Himalayas. Like all of the high peaks in the world, the 26,940-foot Cho Oyu is a challenging peak, and his ascent is a noteworthy achievement. This achievement is even more impressive given that it marks his fifth successful ascent of one of the world's 14 peaks higher than 8,000 meters (26,250 feet). With the ascent of Cho Oyu, Glenn has now reached the summit of one of these high peaks in each of the past three decades. He previously summited Mt. Everest, Makalu (the fifth highest in the world), Mount Shisha Pangma (the thirteenth highest) on which he made the first American ascent, and Lhotse (the fourth highest) on which he also led the first American ascent. For those who climb high peaks and know of the physical demands, logistical complications and harsh environmental conditions involved, having the stamina and wherewithal to continue these climbs is remarkable. And he did it with the help of his expedition team, which was made up of members who were each over 50. As Glenn put it in a recent news story in the Boulder Camera about this ascent, ``Many people are familiar with the adventure book `Into Thin Air' [the Jon Krakauer book about the illfated Everest expedition in 1996 when five people lost their lives]. Well, we referred to our 50-something expedition as `Into Gray Hair.' '' Glenn carries his energy and enthusiasm for climbing into his law practice and his other activities. He is very dedicated to his law practice, where he works to further Colorado's environmental causes on issues such as water rights, conservation and real property law. Glenn somehow also finds time to lead and work for numerous community efforts such as a Board of Trustee of the University of Colorado, past chairman of the board for the Colorado Outward Bound School, and president of the American Alpine Club and the Colorado Mountain Club. Anyone that knows Glenn can attest to his incredible stamina and enduring perseverance. . Glenn is a lifelong resident of the State of Colorado. He graduated from the University of Colorado at Boulder, receiving a Bachelor of Arts with distinction in 1970 and a Juris Doctorate from the University of Colorado School of Law in 1973. After completing his education, he quickly became a member of one of the oldest and largest law firms in the Rocky Mountain West, Holme Roberts & Owen LLC. Glenn went on to become a partner with this firm in 1980 and remained so until 1996, when he became the managing partner of Porzak Browning & Bushong LLP. It was during this time that he began to specialize in environmental law. Over the course of Glenn's 31-year career, he has worked tirelessly to provide all Coloradans with sound legal counsel on many issues. His focus on conservation and water litigation has been the key to his many successes. Some of his notable achievements include: Obtaining the first federal contracts for water from Green Mountain and Ruedi Reservoirs; negotiating the wide-ranging agreement between the Denver Water Department and Summit County to secure water for residents; successfully adjudicating over 125 applications for water rights, changes of water rights, and plans for augmentation and exchange; and negotiating major conservation easements and open space acquisitions for the Meadowdale Ranch, Lily Lake, Caribou Ranch, and Cal-Wood Ranch, all important open space projects in Colorado. Most likely due to his extensive knowledge of and love for the environment, Glenn has taken it upon himself to become an elite and avid mountain climber. He completed over 1,100 summer and winter ascents of peaks over 11,000 feet and climbed numerous other mountains around the world. Because of these experiences, Glenn has been asked numerous times to contribute written pieces for outdoors publications. He has also led various mountaineering clubs and organizations. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in acknowledging the ongoing achievements of Glenn Porzak in mountaineering and in conservation law. Following his ascent of Cho Oyu, Glenn has been quoted as saying that it's time that he started acting his age and suggesting that his expeditions to summit peaks higher than 26,250 feet are over. As those who know Glenn are aware, he has said this before. So, I would not be surprised to see Glenn back on the mountain making yet more climbs. The allure of the outdoors and the majestic peaks are that strong. It is the same allure that calls me to the outdoors and the adventurous challenges that they present. Glenn's passion for the outdoors and his legal work are an inspiring reminder of the determination of the human spirit to surmount any obstacle and meet any challenge--and especially that age needs not be a limiting factor. I'm sure that Glenn will remain active in these and other important endeavors.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank and honor Robert Poirot for his exemplary public service as Clear Creek County Commissioner for the past twelve years. I would also like to thank him on behalf of all Coloradans for the in-depth and diverse philanthropic work he has contributed to the community. He is a dedicated public servant who has devoted himself to ensuring that Colorado remains a very special place to live. Throughout his life, Bob has demonstrated time and time again that he excels in all of his endeavors. Whether it is in the Armed Forces, education, or government, Bob has shown that he can apply his leadership skills effectively in any arena. He has received numerous awards during his long and extensive career, most recently the prestigious Distinguished Service Award of Colorado Counties, Inc. . . . This award is a true testament to Bob's abilities to work together with all interests for the common good. Between 1959 and 1992, Bob achieved the rank of Brigadier General in the Colorado Army National Guard. During this time, he also served for thirty-two years as a school teacher, including four years on the Board of Education. At the same time, he found time to coach both football and track. Upon retirement, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Award by the Jefferson County School District. Using his extensive command of the issues, Bob participated in and offered advice to almost every steering committee throughout his twelve years serving as County Commissioner. Building upon this, he also testified here at the nation's Capital in support of legislation to preserve and maintain public lands in Clear Creek County which are important for wildlife and the quality of life in Colorado. During this time, I was able to personally work at length with Bob in mutual support of the environment, an issue that remains high on the agenda of all Coloradans. Thanks to his leadership, more than 6,000 acres of land were properly distributed to public and private land owners, ensuring that the Front Range population will continue to enjoy this cherished and pristine land for many years. Along these same lines, Bob has worked tirelessly on local issues in the state. As a member of the Board of Directors for the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), Bob spearheaded many regional policies. Working on transportation issues has proved to be one of his strong suits, as he has emphasized the creation of a new bus service to connect adjacent Clear Creek and Jefferson Counties. Another of Bob's transportation successes occurred when he helped gain approval of the Guanella Pass Road Project from the Federal Highway Administration's federal lands program. The result will be to improve this important and scenic roadway affecting numerous jurisdictions including Park County, the Town of Georgetown, and the U.S. Forest Service. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our gratitude to Robert Poirot for his many years of public service and his contributions to the people of Colorado. Robert has displayed exceptional moral fiber throughout his life, and for that I believe we should acknowledge and celebrate his work and accomplishments. Bob's tireless dedication to his community and country stands as a model for what can be accomplished when citizens participate in our democracy. Although he is leaving his service as a county commissioner, I am sure that he will remain active and involved in the community. I wish him and his family good health and happiness for many years to come.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill which will name the post office at 4985 Moorhead Ave. in Boulder, Colorado the Donald G. Brotzman Post Office Building. Mr. Brotzman served in this body during the Vietnam War and the Nixon era. Even though our country was highly divided, he rose above partisan politics and reached across the aisle to work in a bipartisan manner. He was the kind of public official I admire. Don Brotzman died in September at the age of 82. During his lifetime he admirably served both his country and the state of Colorado. Born in Sterling, Colorado, he was an All Conference lineman at the University of Colorado in the 1930s. While attending the CU-Boulder he joined the military and served as a first lieutenant with the 81st Infantry Division in the South Pacific. When he returned to the United States he finished his degree in both business and law and opened a law firm in Boulder, Colorado. Between 1945 and 1954 he served in both the Colorado State House of Representatives and Senate. In 1959 he was appointed by President Eisenhower as U.S. Attorney. In 1963, as the nominee for the Republican Party, he was elected to serve the 2nd Congressional District of Colorado in the U.S. House of Representatives. During his five terms in office he served on the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee. He was instrumental in the passing of the Indian Peaks Wilderness Act, a national program to help runaway youths and establishing a tax credit for higher education expenses. He also helped shape the Clean Air Act and the Public Broadcasting Act. Mr. Brotzman was an early champion of stronger environmental oversight at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, and due to his efforts, the Johnson administration commissioned a scientific study which led to the eventual cleanup and closure of this site. He was also one of the first members to call for an all-volunteer Army and the end of the draft during the Vietnam War. After serving in Congress, Mr. Brotzman was able to assist in the establishment of the all-volunteer Army when he was named Assistant Secretary to the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs by President Ford. He served in this position for 2 years and explained his job as making ``the all- volunteer army work.'' In the Colorado State Legislature, Congress and two Republican administrations, Mr. Brotzman served our country and Colorado well. His dedication to acting on his conscience and working on both sides of the aisle to better serve Colorado made him a leader in Congress. I hope my colleagues will join me and the Colorado delegation in honoring this outstanding Coloradan and support the naming of the Donald G. Brotzman Post Office Building.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank and honor my compassionate and caring constituent, Ms. Barbara Martig. Barb's efforts have greatly impacted the lives of senior citizens for many years, and she deserves recognition for the many contributions she has made to our community. Throughout her life, Barb has demonstrated time and again that she is dedicated to advancing the cause of seniors. While working for the Boulder County Aging Services, she also volunteered her time to numerous committees and councils relating to the advancement of the senior agenda. Due to this unwavering devotion to her work, she was recently chosen to receive the ``Women Who Light Up The Community'' award. This honor, given by the Boulder Chamber of Commerce, is presented to people who volunteer their time and talents to make Boulder County a better place to live, work and play. In addition to her work with the elderly, Barb has worked tirelessly on transportation issues. By participating in the City of Boulder's Future Search Project, she contributed to the creation of a new bus line for our community and helped in finding solutions to many public transit problems that arose. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join with me in expressing our gratitude to Ms. Martig for touching our community in far-reaching ways. In a time when we still face insurmountable odds regarding the welfare of our senior citizens, we must recognize that there are people such as Barb who have an innate devotion to our elderly citizens. I'm proud to offer warm congratulations to Barb on her award, honor her achievements, and wish her continued success in all her future endeavors. She stands out as a beacon of our community, who truly lights up many of our lives.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank and honor Jo Ann Sorensen for her exemplary public service as Clear Creek County Commissioner for almost eight years. I would also like to thank her on behalf of all Coloradans for the in-depth and diverse philanthropic work that she has contributed to the community. She has ensured that our great state remains a very special place to live and has innately displayed the qualities of a dedicated public servant. Throughout her life, Jo Ann has demonstrated time and time again that she excels in all of her endeavors. She has served on almost every possible steering committee to represent not only Clear Creek County's interests, but also those of the I-70 corridor communities. It has been through this committee work that Jo Ann has achieved her numerous successes. Putting local and regional issues at the forefront of her agenda, she has systematically made it her cause to learn and understand the problems that plague our community. Through the wealth of knowledge that she has acquired, she has been able to help address these issues with her fellow County Commissioners, allowing her to volunteer her time for various other projects. Recently, Jo Ann was selected to receive the prestigious Colorado Counties, Inc., CCI, Commissioner of the Year Award. This award is a true testament to Jo Ann's long and distinguished list of achievements. Jo Ann's work spans many areas. Aside from serving as Vice Chairman of the CCI Mountain District, she has spearheaded many reforms to better the lives of Colorado citizens. Working with her colleague Clear Creek County Commissioners, Jo Ann has greatly contributed to many transportation initiatives for the 1-70 Corridor Counties, while at the same time helping to revamp the Emergency Services in her area by pushing for the Reverse 911 Programs. It is this type of multi-faceted focus that has allowed Jo Ann to direct her energies into numerous projects and reforms. But if one was to look at her many accomplishments, they would notice that her strengths reside squarely in her efforts to maintain the environment. Not only has Jo Ann testified at the Colorado Water Conservation Board on watershed development impacts, she has led the fight to protect the Beaver Brook Watershed property and participated in the establishment of the James Peak Wilderness. Her emphasis on preservation has allowed all Coloradans to enjoy the ridgeline beauty and pristine lakes that Colorado has to offer. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in expressing our gratitude to Jo Ann Sorensen for her many years of public service and her contributions to the people of Colorado. I have only touched on a small fraction of Jo Ann's work, and I believe that she has displayed numerous times why she is deserving of our recognition. Although she is leaving her post as a county commissioner, I am sure, given her energy, dedication and passion for maintaining and improving the quality of life for all Coloradans that she will remain active in community issues. I wish her and her family good health and happiness for many years to come.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of the town of Minturn, Colorado. Minturn is a small town on the Western Slope of Colorado, with a population of a little over 1,000. Despite its size, Minturn holds an important place within Colorado's history. It began in 1887 as a railroad crew-changing station and was named in honor of Robert B. Minturn, who helped secure funds to build the Denver & Rio Grande westward down the Eagle and Colorado Rivers. The town quickly grew as more people began to make Colorado their home. Some established homesteads to farm in this area at the confluence of Gore Creek and the Eagle River, while others sought riches mining for silver in the mountains high above the town site. On November 15, 1904, the first Town Council met and Minturn officially became an incorporated part of Colorado. This date became synonymous with the town's birth and was therefore marked as a day of celebration. In the years to come, Minturn became especially indicative of the Colorado experience. After its vital infrastructures were in place, Minturn attracted people from all walks of life. Historic hotels that still exist today were erected to accommodate the influx of travelers passing through Colorado. And even the military became interested in Minturn, constructing a temporary training camp there for the 10th Mountain Division in 1942--a division that helped train soldiers to fight in high alpine conditions. As the years passed, Minturn became a favorite stop amongst snow sports enthusiasts, due to its close location to some of Colorado's largest ski resorts, Vail and Beaver Creek. Recently, the town's beauty was on display in movies such as Walt Disney's ``Tall Tales'', and during the Winter Olympics of 2002, when the Olympic torch passed through the town en route to Salt Lake City, Utah. I also have great pride in stating that one of my district offices is located in Minturn. Because of this connection--as well as the town's respect for it's western rural roots--I have developed an affinity with this town and appreciate the friendliness and communal spirit of its residents. This community has welcomed me to their town in a manner that greatly reflects the essence of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me today in commemorating the historic 100th anniversary of Minturn, Colorado. I believe that by honoring Minturn and all the other historic small towns of this vast Nation, we keep the great tradition of the American spirit alive for future generations. We must not forget about the many places that molded this nation into what it is today. Centennial celebrations are few and far between, and Minturn's is deserving of our recognition.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Charles ``Charley'' Shimanski, an accomplished mountain climber who served as Executive Director of the American Alpine Club from 1993 until his retirement in October of this year. Charley grew up in Madison, Wisconsin, and graduated from the University of Wisconsin in 1981 with a degree in Economics. He worked in the financial services sector for 12 years both in Europe and in Denver, including at Oppenheimer Funds, United Bank and Darlington Asset Management of Geneva, Switzerland. But a big part of his heart was always in the mountains. Charley's love of climbing has taken him throughout Colorado's mountainous landscape, especially the backcountry peaks in Rocky Mountain National Park. He also climbed in the Swiss Alps and the Cascades along the Pacific Northwest. Raised with a belief that volunteer service is the price one pays for living on this planet, it did not take long before his love of the mountains and his passion to serve the community combined into an almost 20-year commitment to the mountain rescue community. In 1985, Charley joined the Alpine Rescue Team, a volunteer mountain rescue group that provides rescue services in portions of the Front Range and Summit County, including 4 of Colorado's Fourteeners (peaks with elevations over 14,000 feet, for those unfamiliar with the term). Within 4 years he was president of Alpine Rescue Team, and over the years he has served as the team's mission leader, public information officer and helicopter specialist. In 1997, Charley was honored by the Colorado Search and Rescue Board with the Hunter Holloway Spirit Award for his work developing Colorado's ``Avalanche Awareness Week.'' Avalanches are a serious issue in Colorado and other mountainous western states. Sadly, lives are lost every year to avalanches and western states frequently encounter road closures due to avalanches, which affects local economies and tourism. As a result, Charley's contributions here are very significant and worthy of such recognition. Eventually Charley's focus expanded from the Alpine Rescue Team and Colorado search and rescue activities to the national Mountain Rescue Association (MRA) and international rescue consulting. He has served as chair of the MRA's Rocky Mountain Region and continues to serve as chair of the organization's Education Committee. Charley is the author of several national MRA manuals, including ``Accidents in Mountain Rescue Operations,'' ``Search and Rescue for Outdoor Leaders,'' ``Helicopters in Search and Rescue Operations,'' and ``Avalanche Rescue Operations.'' He is a frequent lecturer at meetings of the Wilderness Medical Society, the Mountain Rescue Association and the International Technical Rescue Symposium, and has consulted with government agencies and rescue groups throughout the world. Despite these awards and accomplishments, Charley's most personally rewarding search and rescue mission was the 1990 rescue of a lost hiker in which he served as incident commander. The hiker was found after 12 hours, but, more importantly, the ``reporting party'' was a woman who later became Charley's wife. It was the only instance anyone in the mountain rescue community can recall in which a person who reported a search eventually married one of the rescuers. In May 1993, Charley left the corporate world to work full time on climbing and mountaineering issues as the executive director of the American Alpine Club (AAC), a national association of climbers and mountaineers dedicated to promoting climbing knowledge, conserving mountain environments and representing the American climbing community. At that time, the AAC had a membership base of 1,700 members, annual operating revenue of $300,000 and net assets of $2.8 million. Charley often remarked that the AAC's greatest asset was its potential. Over his 11-year tenure as executive director, he spurred the Club into action on a number of fronts. The AAC, in partnership with the Colorado Mountain Club, bought and renovated the historic (and then vacant) Junior High School building in Golden, Colorado at the foot of the Front Range, turning it from a public eyesore into the American Mountaineering Center, a facility housing several regional and national climbing organizations and hosting climbing-related conferences and events. He oversaw a transformation in the Club's library from an obscure collection of unorganized mountaineering books into arguably the finest mountaineering library in the world, fully cataloged and electronically searchable by any Internet user in the world. He expanded the AAC's advocacy efforts on behalf of climbers so that the Club was a leading voice on such issues as mountain rescue, climbing ethics, conservation of alpine regions, and management of climbing destinations both domestically and abroad. Charley was an enthusiastic advocate of the AAC Press, the Club's publishing arm, which documented world climbing and published award winning historical guidebooks to several climbing disciplines. In October, Charley resigned from the AAC and accepted a position as Executive Director of the Colorado Association of Nonprofit Organizations. When he left the AAC, it had grown to 7,500 members, an annual operating budget of $1.3 million and net assets of $7 million-- an almost four-fold increase in most categories. The organization's staff grew in both size and professional capability during his tenure. Though his leadership will be missed by American climbers, he looks forward to new challenges rallying the Colorado nonprofit community to similar gains.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, after the horrific attacks of September 11, Americans understand the significance and seriousness of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. Developed in a bipartisan manner after long study and debate, the recommendations (if implemented) would radically reorganize the intelligence community and unify government efforts to prevent future terrorist attacks. Of course, once the depth of the failure of our intelligence agencies became clear after 9-11, many of us recognized the need for such reform. The question Congress asked the 9-11 Commission to answer was--how? We got an answer in the form of the 9-11 Commission report. The Commission put forth forty-one in depth recommendations to serve as a proposed blueprint for intelligence reform. While I believe Congress should not necessarily rubber-stamp the Commission's work, I also believe that we should honor the bipartisan spirit of the Commission by working in a similarly bipartisan way to reach agreement on the best way to implement the recommendations. That is what has been so deeply disappointing about the process in the House. While the Senate--through an open and deliberative process-- reached agreement on a substantive bill that reflects the views of both parties, the Commission, and the families of 9-11 victims, the House has played shameful politics with intelligence reform. The Republican bill (H.R. 10) only fully implements eleven of the 41 recommendations of the 9-11 Commission, while it ignores some of the most important Commission recommendations. For instance, it fails to give the National Intelligence Director sufficient authority over the budgets and personnel of intelligence agencies. It fails to include a strong National Counterterrorism Center. It fails to strengthen the Nunn-Lugar programs and other nonproliferation programs to secure nuclear materials around the world. It fails to create an integrated border screening system to improve security at our borders. It fails to improve communications for first responders. It fails to create a government-wide Civil Liberties Oversight Board to review the use of intelligence powers and address civil liberties concerns. The list goes on. Meanwhile, the bill includes dozens of extraneous provisions that the Commission did not recommend and that are opposed by the Commission, families of 9-11 victims, human rights and civil liberties groups, and some by the White House itself. The provisions include new authority allowing the President to completely undo the intelligence reforms passed by Congress, expedited removal of undocumented immigrants without judicial review, revocation of visas, exceptions to the UN Convention Against Torture, and allowing the U.S. government to spy on individuals without proving they are connected to a foreign government or terrorist group, among others. These extraneous provisions aren't just objectionable because of their content--they are objectionable because at a time when we most need to think of country before politics, to find ways to come together to make our country safer, not ways to further divide us, the Republican leadership is more interested in scoring political points than in passing responsible legislation. Even so, I am voting for H.R. 10 today because I believe that we need intelligence reform. This bill does not go far enough to protect the American people, but it is better than no reform at all. The good news is that the Senate--by a 96-2 vote--produced a bipartisan bill that should help strengthen the Senate's hand (and the voice of reason) in the conference committee. With the President supporting the Senate bill and every Republican in the Senate voting for it, it seems to me that House Republicans' misguided criticisms of the bill in conference won't carry much weight. I am optimistic that the conference report will more closely reflect the Senate bill. As 9/11 Commissioners Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton wrote in the Washington Post last month, ``We should not wait until another [intelligence] failure takes place, until another commission has a task as somber as ours. We welcome refinements to our recommendations through the legislative process. But the time has come to act.'' H.R. 10 is not the legislative refinement Commissioners Kean and Hamilton had in mind, nor is it mine. But it is a start. As the legislative process continues, I will do all I can to help move the bill in the right direction. I hope my colleagues across the aisle will do the same. At a time when our security is at risk, Congress must set politics aside and pass intelligence reform legislation that will truly make America safer.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, it would be better if we did not have to be considering this special rule, but I will support it because I support the conference report and hope it can be passed as soon as possible. There are things in the conference report that I do not like, and there are some things I hoped that would be included that have been left out, but my concerns are outweighed by my strong approval of several provisions that are included. One is the renewal of the Energy Savings Performance Contracts program. This is the best tool we have to encourage energy efficiency in the Federal Government, but its authorization ended a year ago; and since then, it has been in limbo. So this is a very important provision. The conference report also makes many improvements in the compensation program for people injured while working in the nuclear weapons program. My colleague, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), was just discussing these important provisions. It is also important for Colorado because we are the home of the Rocky Flats Nuclear Waste complex, a former nuclear weapons site. And with the rest of our delegation, I have been pressing to make sure that the people who work there are properly treated. That is the purpose of this compensation program. Right now, the program has serious problems; but this conference report, as I have suggested, goes a long way towards solving them. The report consolidates the responsibility for handling claims in the Labor Department, which can help untangle red tape for thousands of claims; and it provides that the Federal Government, not the States, will pay claims and provide medical benefits, something that is vital because otherwise many people will not be paid, even though they have valid claims. Further, it makes sure that people will be paid by making payments an entitlement. These are all great steps forward and long overdue. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Ranking Member Skelton) and all of the other conferees, as well as the Committee on Armed Services staff and the staff of the other committees involved. Their task was not easy because the administration has not been particularly helpful, but we can all be proud of this outcome. They deserve our thanks, Mr. Speaker, and the conference report deserves our approval.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, there is much to dislike about the process that has brought this conference report before the House, and there certainly are things to dislike in the conference report itself. This is not the best way to do business, and this conference report certainly is not an ideal legislative produce. On the contrary, it is filled with flaws and with provisions that are unnecessary at best. However, with all its flaws, I will vote for the conference report. I will vote for it because we need to make the changes in tax laws needed to end the escalating retaliatory tariffs that are being imposed because our current laws are not in compliance with our international agreements. This is a matter of great urgency and this conference report responds to it. I will vote for it because it includes provisions to encourage American corporations doing business abroad to repatriate their overseas earnings for investment here at home. This has great potential to stimulate investment in new plant and equipment as well as in the research and development that support innovation, job creation, and prosperity. I will vote for it because I think the provisions related to foreign tax credits will increase the competitiveness of America's information- technology companies in global markets. I will vote for it because it includes provisions to ensure that employee stock-purchase plans and incentive stock options are not subject to payroll taxes--provisions that are very important to thousands of Coloradans and the companies that employ them. And I will vote for it because it includes provisions that will help us lessen our dependence on fossil fuels--something that is very important because clean power production provides greater reliability for our electricity system, promotes cleaner air and water, and benefits our economy and our national security. The conference report will extend and expand the renewable energy production tax credit (PTC) to apply to other renewable energy technologies, including solar energy, geothermal energy, open-loop biomass, and small irrigation power. An extended PTC will provide more market certainty, and expanding the PTC to include solar, open-loop biomass, geothermal, and small irrigation power will ensure that all renewable energy sources can benefit. Solar, wind, hydropower, biomass and geothermal energy are each potentially enormous energy resources. Every state has renewable energy potential. However, renewable resources are not spread uniformly across the country. Current tax law creates regional and technological inequities by failing to provide uniform benefits for all renewable energy resources. For example, the production tax credit enacted in 1992 has spurred significant new investment, but it only applies to power plants using wind power and closed-loop biomass. Allowing equal access to all the renewable energy sources will not only spur renewable energy investment, but it will also ensure that all renewable energy sources are allowed to compete fairly. Also, importantly, I will vote for this conference report because as it stands it will not increase the deficit--meaning that as it stands it will not increase the national debt that will have to be repaid, with interest, in the future. In making that statement, I refer to the conference report ``as it stands'' because I fully recognize that the present budgetary effect of the conference report reflects the fact that some of its provisions will come into effect in stages, or are temporary, or both. I recognize--as we all recognize, Mr. Speaker--that in the future there will be proposals to extend some or all of the temporary provisions or to speed up the implementation of those that are scheduled to take effect in stages. And I recognize--as we all must-- that adoption of those proposals will have budgetary consequences that should not be ignored. So, Mr. Speaker, I want to give notice here and now that while I am voting for this conference report as it stands, I am making no commitment to supporting any of those proposals. If I still have the honor of serving in this House when any such proposal is considered, I will consider it carefully but I will not support it unless I am convinced that it merits approval. And, further, I want to give notice here and now that my vote for this conference report should not be read as meaning that I fully support each and every one of its provisions. That is certainly not the case, and in fact I hope that I will have the opportunity to support efforts to remove or repair many of those provisions in the future. I could cite many examples, but let me mention just one--the fact that the conference report does not included all the provisions of the Senate bill related to tobacco and tobacco products. Omission of key parts of those provisions means we are missing an opportunity to take an important step toward better health for many Americans, especially children. This is a very bitter disappointment. Mr. Speaker, I am sure that in the days ahead there will be a great deal of public discussion of this conference report in Colorado and across the country. There will be many who will hail it as marking the dawning of a great new day. Many others will bewail parts that they think are examples of bad legislation. I think the second group will have much ammunition. But I also am sure that the rhetoric on both sides will be excessive. My evaluation is that the bill is too flawed to be a model, but that its merits do outweigh its flaws, although not by very much.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Concurrent Resolution 480, expressing the sense of Congress that ``National Take a Kid Mountain Biking Day'' should be established in honor of Jacob Mock Doub. The youth of today's America are becoming less and less active. The U.S. Surgeon General reports the percentage of overweight children has nearly tripled in the past two decades. Forecasts also predict the current generation of children in the United States could actually have a shorter life span than their parents as the epidemic of childhood obesity expands. Promoting physical activity and diet are critical in addressing the rise of childhood obesity and youth inactivity and Congress should be supportive in addressing this important issue. Certainly more needs to be done but this resolution is a step in the right direction to raise awareness and move the discussion forward. The resolution also honors Jacob Mock Doub, a young man who had a great passion for life and for cycling. He encouraged many young people like himself to get involved with the activity. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. For the information of our colleagues, I am attaching an item from the International Mountain Biking Association, IMBA, that provides additional information about Jacob Mock Doub. Jacob Mock ``Jack'' Doub Jul. 11, 1985--Oct. 21, 2002. One year ago this October we unexpectedly lost a great friend and brother when Jack Doub died from complications from an injury received during practice for the Snowshoe NORBA National downhill race last June. To honor Jack's spirit and love of biking we have in association with IMBA, helped to establish the Jack Doub Memorial Fund to promote and encourage other ``kids'' to learn and live to ride. To understand Jack and his love of biking is to understand our wishes to continue his memory. Jack was born to two energetic and loving parents who greatly enjoyed the outdoors and early on Jack enjoyed the same. Skiing at age 18 months, he became an unbelievable freestyle and backcountry skier . . . the best. In life Jack learned to climb, to kayak, to motocross race, and to fly fish. By age 11 Jack's fly-fishing skills and abilities to see and catch fish were legend. It was almost unbelievable that he literally could do anything he wanted and at levels of skill that others only dream about, all of this while quiet, reserved, and humble. Ultimately Jack was introduced to biking at age 11 near Grandfather Mountain, N.C. He saw a friend riding, doing a few tricks and he wanted to learn to wheelie. He was hooked. Within a week he could wheelie like crazy and soon obtained a new Gary Fisher Super Caliber on which he won essentially every cross-country race he entered for two years. Although remaining the best fly fisherman around at age 13, biking had become Jack's obsession. It was at age 13 that Jack obtained a Santa Cruz Super 8 and began racing downhill as well; again nothing but success. One of Jack's greatest sparks was participating in mountain bike ``dirt'' camp during the summer of 1998 at Snowshoe, WV, and this is also where he raced his last race. From age 14 to 17 Jack rode primarily downhill and dual slalom. He found it difficult to train and ride downhill and dual slalom and have the energy to race cross-country on the same day. Cross-country was great but Jack was an adrenalin junkie . . . fast and furious. The neat thing about Jack however was not his desire to race and to win but his absolute love of being on the bike. Whether he podiumed or came in 23rd, his response was always, ``it was great.'' He never complained or had excuses and no matter how bad the mechanical failure or the crash, he always finished . . . never a DNF or withdrawal. For Jack, it was all about the bike . . . cross-country, downhill, dual slalom, trials, or as always just playing in the yard; there were very few days that he didn't touch the bike. Jack rode many bikes and greatly loved his Spooky, his intense M1, and his Santa Cruz Heckler but his real favorite was his Foes Zigzag on which he came in second at the NORBA Snowshoe National in junior expert dual slalom in his last race ever. His accident occurred the next day in downhill training where as usual he was trying to air a major jump and obstacle . . . he later rode but never raced again. His accomplishments were extensive and are too numerous to detail nor would that be his focus. Jack's last ride occurred approximately one week before he died. He was excited to ride a new trail with a group of us. Out of shape but never out of energy, he wheelied the mile to the trail including down a 200 yard hill all the way on a wheelie manual to a nose manual. As usual we were all amazed. During the two hour ride we rode hard, played hard and had worlds of fun. Jack rode through the pain and upset stomach while laughing and smiling and could only talk of getting back in shape and coming back. God, do we miss that next ride with Jack. Despite all of Jack's great accomplishments and skills, his greatest strength was involving and encouraging others to ride, especially children. Jack would skip chances to hang out with his peers just to go to Hobby Park and teach young kids to ride and jump dual slalom . . . he did this even while injured. On occasions he was known to stop in a race and help other individuals. During one 12 hour race he rode two extra laps just to give his friends a break and lessen their pain so as to have more fun. Most importantly he greatly enjoyed seeing his friends do well, especially ``Tone Dog'', ``Magoo'', Jonathan, and Will. Jack's smiles were as big or bigger for their successes than for his own. Jack at heart wanted others to encounter and love life and biking as much as he did. Jay de Jesus wrote in a letter to Jack's dad, Jay after Jack's death; Jack was . . . ``up all night doing manuals and wheelies all the way across the courtyard at Snowshoe Village, the same nice, intelligent, bike-crazy kid with the ever present smile . . . every night, just riding on and on.'' There are no real answers to Jack's passing away, just a huge void. May that void be filled with our smiles and those of other kids experiencing the awesome joy of biking and as Jack would want us to do . . . ``riding on and on''. The Jack Doub Memorial Fund hopes in some small way to continue his spirit and memory to that end. Jack Doub . . . orange helmet, red hair and blue jeans . . . rest in peace brother as you ride in our hearts and memories forever. Friends of Jack Doub.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, because I was part of a Congressional delegation that traveled to Iraq, I missed several votes last week. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: On rollcall No. 469, on ordering the previous question on H. Res. 785, waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 470, on ordering the previous question on H. Res. 794, waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the bill ( H.R. 1308) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to accelerate the increase in the refundability of the child tax credit, and for other purposes, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 471, on adoption of H. Res. 794, I would have voted ``no.'' On rollcall No. 480, adoption of the conference report on H.R. 1308, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5051, the Leonard C. Burch Post Office Building Designation Act. Leonard Burch served as chairman of the Southern Ute Tribe for 30 years. He became the youngest chairman of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe in south-western Colorado in 1966. Although it was criticized at the time, his decision to reinvest tribal royalties back into the tribal corporations has proved to be far sighted. Through this reinvestment the Southern Ute Indian Tribe is one of the wealthiest Indian tribe in the country. In an effort to regain the rights to the resources on their land, Chairman Burch taught himself the intricacies of the oil and gas business. As a result, he was instrumental in the Southern Ute Tribe becoming the primary beneficiary of their own mineral rights. Under his leadership the tribe was able to acquire several commercial buildings, multiple energy companies, including the largest natural gas company in the state of Colorado, a real estate company, and a casino. Chairman Burch championed the cause of tribal sovereignty. He was able to bring the Southern Ute Indian Tribe from relative obscurity into one of the most prominent and wealthy tribes in the country. The Southern Ute Tribe's business success can be used as a positive example for Native American tribes throughout the country. Chairman Burch was the driving force behind this success story. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me and the Colorado delegation in honoring the life and accomplishments of Chairman Leonard Burch and support the designation of the Ignacio Main Post Office as the Leonard C. Burch Post Office Building. For more information about the life of Chairman Burch, I am attaching an obituary published in The Durango Herald on August 2, 2003. Leonard Cloud Burch Leonard Cloud Burch, the longtime leader of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe who advocated economic self-sufficiency, died Friday, Aug. 1, 2003, at Mercy Medical Center. Mr. Burch, 69 who died after suffering a heart attack on Thursday, served as chairman of the Southern Ute Indian Tribal Council for more than 32 years. He was first elected tribal chairman in 1966. Under his leadership the Southern Utes became an economic force in the Four Corners and the largest employers in the country. Starting with interests in natural-gas wells, the Utes used revenues from businesses to fund improvements in tribal education, health and social services. He was invited by five separate U.S. presidents to conferences on American Indian policies at the White House. He received numerous awards, including: the Durango Citizen of the Year Award (1997), the 15th annual Martin Luther King Humanitarian Award (2000) and the Council of Energy Resources Tribes' Achievement Award (2002). He was also recognized for his commitment to regional water resources development. To settle various water claims by regional tribes, including the Southern Utes, Mr. Burch advocated development of the Animas-La Plata Project, a water-storage project now under construction south of Durango. He was born on Dec. 24, 1933, to Sam and Clara (Cloud) Burch. Upon graduation from Ute Vocational High School in Ignacio, he enlisted in the U.S. Air Force, and he served four years. After his return from service, Mr. Burch worked for five years with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. He married Irene Coolidge, who had also attended school in Ignacio. He is survived by his wife; seven daughters, Leonora Bravo of Ignacio, Leona Burch of Ignacio, Lena Mae Burch of Missoula, Mont., Lisa Burch-Watts of Ignacio, Leora Lucero of Ignacio. Laurena Burch of Albuquerque, and Lynnette Sage of Ignacio; 14 grandchildren; a brother, Anthony Burch of Two Rivers, Alaska; a sister, Bertha Grove of Bayfield; a half- brother, Everett Burch of Bayfield; and a half-sister, Judy Lansing-Burch of Ignacio. A viewing and a visitation will be from noon to 8 p.m. Monday at Hood Mortuary. A public memorial service will be at 10 a.m. Tuesday at the SunUte Recreation Center in Ignacio. Donations honoring Mr. Burch should be made to the Leonard Burch Scholarship Fund, PO Box 2717, Durango CO 81302 or to the American Heart Association.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I will vote against this amendment because I am concerned that whatever benefits it might have are outweighed by the costs to the taxpayers that it would entail. The current jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit is certainly extensive--from Alaska to Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas and including California, Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The populations of several of these states have increased considerably in recent years, and it can be anticipated that the caseloads of the Ninth Circuit will continue to increase accordingly. So, there might be something to be said for realigning the judicial districts now included in the Ninth Circuit. However, I do not think that it is appropriate for the House of Representatives to make such an important decision on the basis of the very brief consideration that we are being permitted today. And I certainly think that before making such a serious decision, we should consider how it would affect the ability of the federal courts to do their job. Regarding that aspect of the matter, I think we should all pay careful heed to the analysis of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts contained in a May 14th letter from its Director, Leonidas Ralph Meacham, to Senator Feinstein. Discussing proposals to divide the Ninth Circuit in ways similar to that proposed in this amendment, Mr. Meacham wrote ``The judiciary is not in a position to absorb any of the additional costs'' that would result. He goes on to say that dividing the Ninth Circuit into three circuits--which is what this amendment would do--``would likely require one-time start-up funding ranging from $16.7 million to $18.9 million for space alterations, information technology and telecommunications infrastructure, furniture, and law books. In addition, a new courthouse would have to be built'' (and another modernized) that would cost millions more. Also, according to Mr. Meacham, ``The judiciary would also require an additional $21.7 million annually in recurring personnel and operating expenses.'' At a time when our courts are already hard-pressed for funding and the overall federal budget is drowning in red ink, I think we should not lightly incur such additional costs--and certainly not on the basis of a mere 40 minutes of debate on this amendment. Instead, any measure to realign the Ninth Circuit--or any other part of the federal courts, for that matter--should be carefully reviewed in committee and then considered by the House of Representatives under procedures that allow full consideration of its potential benefits and the costs that would be involved. If such a measure is considered under those considerations, I will review it carefully and will support it if I am convinced that it deserves approval. However, I have not reached that conclusion about this amendment and so I will vote against it.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I cannot support changing the Constitution along the lines of this proposal--so I will not vote for this resolution. Under our federal system, there are many matters where the states have broad latitude to shape their laws and policies in ways their residents think fit, subject to the constitution's provisions that protect the rights of individual citizens. One of those areas has been family law, including the regulation of marriage and divorce--but this amendment would change that. Adoption of this amendment would for the first time impose a constitutional restriction on the ability of a state to define marriage. And it would do so in a way that would restrict, not protect, individual rights that now are protected by at least some state constitutions. In my opinion, this is neither necessary nor appropriate. Some of the resolution's supporters say it is needed so a state whose laws ban same-sex marriages or civil unions will not be forced to recognize such marriages or unions established under another state's laws. They say this could happen because Article IV of the Constitution requires each state to give ``full faith and credit'' to another state's ``public acts, records, and judicial proceedings.'' But my understanding is that this part of the constitution has not required states to recognize the validity of all marriages of people from other states. In fact, over the years various states have refused to recognize some out-of-state marriages--and the ``full faith and credit'' clause has not been used to validate marriages because marriages are not ``judgments'' but ``civil contracts'' that a state may choose to recognize as a matter of comity, not as a constitutional requirement. As if this were not enough, in 1996 Congress passed and President Clinton signed into law the ``Defense of Marriage Act.'' That law says ``No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.'' Not everyone thinks this was a good thing for Congress to do--I myself am not sure that it was. But the fact is that this law is on the books and has not been successfully challenged. Given this history, I am not convinced that this constitutional amendment is necessary to prevent the ``full faith and credit'' clause being used to compel a state to recognize a same-sex marriage. Moreover, when you focus on the language of the proposed amendment it becomes clear that protecting states is not its real purpose. That purpose could be achieved by an amendment to the ``full faith and credit'' clause--perhaps by putting language along the lines of the ``Defense of Marriage Act'' into the constitution itself. But that is not what is being proposed here. Instead, this amendment would restrict states, by establishing a single definition of marriage--the only definition that any state could recognize. And unlike other constitutional amendments, it would not protect individuals either. It would write into the constitution a new limit on what legal rights they could hope to have protected by a state or the federal government. If adopted, this amendment would restrict individual liberties instead of expanding them. I think it is clear the real purpose of this amendment is to lay a foundation for discrimination against some Americans on the basis of their sexual orientation. In good conscience, I cannot support this. Mr. Speaker, no proposed constitutional amendment should be taken lightly. On the contrary, I think such proposals require very careful scrutiny and should not be adopted unless there we are convinced that a change in our fundamental law is essential. I do not think this resolution meets that test, and so I will vote against it.

Mr. UDALL of Colorado

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, and congratulate my Colorado colleague, Mr. Tancredo, for his leadership in introducing it. I joined as a cosponsor of this bill because I also want to improve the ability of the land-managing agencies to adequately enforce the rules that apply to uses of the Federal lands. That is also why I also introduced a related bill--H.R. 751, the Responsible Off-road Vehicle Enforcement and Response Act, or ``ROVER.'' My bill is narrow. It deals only with enforcement of the regulations for use of vehicles on National Forest lands and public lands managed by BLM. This bill goes much further. In addition to the forests and BLM lands, it also applies to lands managed by the National Park Service and the refuges managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service. And it addresses the enforcement of all regulations, not just those related to use of vehicles. In the Resources Committee, Mr. Tancredo and I worked with Chairman Pombo, Ranking Member Rahall, and other Members, to develop a substitute that included a number of improvements in the bill. After the Resources Committee completed its work, the measure was reviewed by the Judiciary Committee, and the bill now before the House reflects changes made in that committee. It also includes the provisions of H.R. 1038, the Public Lands Fire Regulations Enforcement Act of 2003--also approved by the Resources and Judiciary Committees last year--which would increase the maximum fine for violations of regulations related to campfires. I also cosponsored that measure. As I said, I do support the legislation before us. I hope the House will approve it, because legislation for better and more consistent enforcement of regulations is needed. However, we need to recognize that it is only one part of a bigger picture. Even more than new legislation, it seems to me, the land-managing agencies need more resources--more money and more people--if we want them to do a better job. As approved by the Resources Committee, H.R. 3247 would have helped with that, too, by allowing the agencies to use money from fines to help pay for some of the restoration work caused by violations of regulations, as well as for offsetting the administrative costs involved in enforcement of those regulations. Unfortunately, the Judiciary Committee evidently had some concerns about that part of the legislation, and so the bill now before us does not include those provisions. This is something that I think should be addressed in the future, and I will seek to work with other Members to do that. Today, however, we can take an important step forward by passing this bill, and I urge the House to approve it.