Tom Udall

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, Rio Rancho, NM, is known as the City of Vision. It exists today because of the vision of countless citizens and public servants who are transforming a desert into a metropolis. Toni Beatty had a particular kind of vision. While others imagined homes and businesses and roads, she imagined a community of readers and thinkers and dreamers. When Toni moved to Rio Rancho in 1986, the town had just begun to grow into a city. She was hired to build a library system that would keep pace with the area's dramatic growth. As Rio Rancho has grown over the last two decades, Toni's libraries have grown with it. They have hosted art shows and horse fairs. They have exposed residents to ancient cultures and current events. And they have always reflected Toni's remarkable combination of intellectual curiosity and public spirit. Now, Toni is leaving Rio Rancho to return to Mexico City. She leaves behind a community more developed in every way than the one she moved to 22 years ago. She also leaves behind a library system that would be the envy of any city. During her time in Rio Rancho, she recruited and trained a professional staff that will remember her ability and kindness long after she has left. Rio Rancho will miss her, but we wish her well as she begins the next chapter in her impressive career.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, I rise today to voice my opposition to H.R. 5349, which extends the Protect America Act. Last August, I joined 182 of my colleagues in opposing the Protect America Act. I opposed the PAA then because I felt it did not adequately protect our civil liberties from a continually over-reaching executive branch. The Bush administration has repeatedly tried, and with some degree of success, to extend its powers in ways that I believe encroach on our civil liberties. This legislation continues to allow these surveillance activities without providing adequate safeguards to protect Americans from this encroachment on their civil liberties. The passage of the PAA was hasty and ill-conceived. Our intelligence community will not stop its activities should this bill expire. In fact, the PAA explicitly states that authorizations issued prior to its expiration would remain in effect until their expiration. Knowing that our Nation can continue to protect itself until more balanced legislation is passed, I can not support this extension. Last November, the House took a stand and passed the RESTORE Act, a strong bill that gives our intelligence community the resources it needs to do its job, but also ensures that our Constitutionally guaranteed rights remain intact. Because the RESTORE Act was able to achieve all these purposes, I was able to support its passage. Because the PAA does not achieve this balance, I cannot agree to let it remain our rule of law. I continue to believe that we must have the best possible intelligence to protect our nation, but that it can be done in a manner that does not uproot the basic rights and principles guaranteed to us by our Founding Fathers. I look forward to working with my colleagues to build on the RESTORE Act.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, I rise today to proudly introduce legislation to award the Congressional Gold Medal to some of the most valiant and courageous soldiers who have ever fought for our Nation--the troops who battled and were prisoners of war at Bataan during World War II. Nearly seven decades ago, the United States responded to the attacks on Pearl Harbor by declaring war--and more than 5,000 miles away in the Philippines, thousands of American soldiers, many of whom were from my State of New Mexico, found themselves on the frontline of this global fight. For 4 months, in the face of overwhelming odds and without ready supplies or reinforcements, these troop fought and died for their Nation. Their efforts not only provided the U.S. with much needed stories of heroism during a dire, dark time of the war, their sacrifice also substantively provided much needed time for U.S. and Allied commanders to regroup, plan, and prepare for the Pacific battle. Without these troops delaying the momentum of the enemy, the U.S. might not have fully recovered from the Pearl Harbor attack until much later. After months of fighting and with his men starving and sick, on April 9, 1942, the commander of the troops at Bataan reluctantly surrendered. Shortly thereafter, nearly 12,000 American troops and 67,000 Filipino troops were forced to march through tropical heat and without food or water for days on end in what became known as the Bataan Death March. Many died during this time, and those who survived were subject to three years of mistreatment, malnutrition, sickness and captivity before being rescued and released near the end of the war. For the State of New Mexico, this chapter of World War II is particularly near to our hearts. New Mexico's 200th and 515th Coast Artillery units served with significant honor during the battle of Bataan, earning the distinction of being the ``first to fire'' on the enemy on December 8, 1941. Many of the Americans captured and held as prisoners of war were from New Mexico, and of the 1,800 who left home to fight, half did not return. Further, nearly a third of those did return home after their tortuous 3 years of captivity died within a year, most often due to complications from health issues directly attributed to their time in the POW camps. The 200th and 515th also are notable because they largely consisted of Hispanic soldiers, a group that at the time was often subject to discrimination in the military due simply to their ethnicity. Despite these barriers, they fought without hesitation, noting that they were as American as any other soldier who wore the uniform. They came from every corner of the State, from Farmington to Alamogordo, from Deming to Raton, and from Clovis to Gallup. Many years ago, my father Stewart Udall wrote a book called Majestic Journey chronicling the early explorations of North America in the sixteenth century. He described the vision, the individualism, and the pioneering spirit of early Hispanic explorers, and I believe that like these explorers, the actions of the Bataan prisoners of war ``resonate through the annals of our history, and the imprint they left on our culture is both permanent and profound. They will add a special luster to our national story.'' Every year, thousands of people participate in the Bataan Memorial Death March at White Sand Missile Range in southern New Mexico. The 26.2 mile march not only marks the historical significance of the event, but reminds us of how many in New Mexico underwent the ordeals at Bataan. In AIbuquerque, stone columns rise from the ground at the Bataan Memorial Park, each of them bearing both the names of those who returned from Bataan and those who did not. In Santa Fe, the Military Museum bears the name of Bataan, reminding all who enter of the costs of war and the sacrifice made by our soldiers. And all across the country are similar memorials, keeping alive the memory of those who went through years of suffering at Bataan. I want to thank the New Mexico Hispanic Cultural Preservation League for their help on this legislation. Also, General Leo Marquez, General Edward Baca, General Melvyn Montano, General Gene Chavez, General Kenny Montoya, and New Mexico Department of Veterans Services Secretary John Garcia for their continued insistence that we honor the Bataan veterans. Madam Speaker, we must never forget the sacrifice of our soldiers, particularly during times of war. We are reminded daily of the hardships and danger faced by the men and women currently fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Like the soldiers of Bataan, these brave troops fight for patriotism, for duty, and for country. I hope my colleagues will join me to honor the sacrifice of the soldiers at Bataan by awarding them the Congressional Gold Medal.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, a lot of brilliant economists have spent a lot of time over the last few weeks telling the American people what we already know: our economy needs help. The debate goes on over whether today's economic conditions will become an official recession, but most people aren't interested in official definitions. We want help now. Fortunately, members of the New Direction Congress, meeting on a bipartisan basis, have developed an economic stimulus package that will get America moving again. There's a lot to like about the proposed stimulus package. The package provides support immediately. American families will receive help by June, in time to stop America's economic slide before we find ourselves mired in recession. This timely action is the result of a feeling in Congress that getting things done for the American people is more important than scoring political points. The package will put money in the hands of working families who need it most. By helping families too poor to pay income tax, this proposal shows both compassion and common sense. We know that poor families are more likely to spend their rebate checks immediately, and that means more money flowing into our economy more rapidly. And, finally, the package will not purchase short term growth at the expense of long term prosperity. This legislation does what must be done, but, more importantly, it does no more than is necessary. It contains no giveaways to any interest group, no pork barrel spending and no rushed changes in our tax code. The bill provides targeted, temporary stimulus. As a result, it will secure our present without burdening our future with debt. But the package that we pass today is not perfect. We have helped millions of families, but too many seniors still need our support. We have provided relief to millions of workers, but those who have seen their jobs disappear still face an uncertain future they did nothing to earn and can do little to change. We have provided temporary relief to millions of taxpayers, but we must renew the clean energy tax credits that give us hope for a stronger national economy and a more sustainable world. Our work is not over. We should celebrate today's accomplishment, but we must recognize that it is a first step, not a final one. Let's take the bipartisan spirit that has been kindled in the House and use it to do the work that remains to be done.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, sail boat racers, mining companies and Henry Kissinger don't have much in common. But they share this: all have relied on the passion and ingenuity of Chuck Robinson. Chuck has been finding solutions to tough problems for most of his 88 years. He has received more than 30 patents for ideas ranging from better ways to transport iron ore to better ways to build a sailboat. His ideas have made him a leader in business and government. Even his home displays Chuck's brilliance and commitment to his community. His home features the world's largest heating system in a private home. And after all these accomplishments, Chuck has not slowed down. I rise today to honor Chuck for receiving New Mexico's first Visionary Designer Lifetime Achievement Award. The award recognizes that Chuck has already put in a lifetime's worth of work tackling tough problems, but those who know him recognize that Chuck's work is far from over. I look forward to admiring Chuck's incredible abilities for years to come.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, the men and women who put on the uniform of the National Guard have acted with extreme bravery and integrity. Through the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, these soldiers have fought valiantly, without question and without reservations, and they embody the entire spirit of service. In New Mexico, the National Guard has played an historic role in defending our Nation. Members of the New Mexico National Guard served as ``Rough Riders'' on San Juan Hill with Teddy Roosevelt, served as prisoners of war at Bataan for horrendous years during World War II, and were deployed to Operation Desert Shield. Whether fighting during a time of war, assisting local and State law enforcement, or guarding our borders, New Mexico's National Guard stands ``ready to fight'' and accomplishes every mission it receives with distinction and with pride. We in the House offer our unconditional support of these men and women, and I strongly support this legislation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, I rise today with great disappointment that the intransigence of the President and the minority in the Senate has presented us with only bad options to fix the AMT. If we do nothing, this bad tax is going to affect families it was never supposed to affect. The bill forces us to choose between saddling middle class families in New Mexico with additional tax burdens under the AMT and saddling our grandchildren with debt because of the fiscal irresponsibility of past Congresses. Twice this year the House has done right by middle class families, fixing the AMT and paying for the fix by closing two different tax loopholes that allow some of the wealthiest in the Nation avoid income taxes. The minority in the Senate, unfortunately, spurred by the President whom they continue to follow in lock-step, blocked both of those commonsense efforts because they don't represent the middle class. So we find ourselves in the predicament we face today. I do not believe that middle class families in my state should be penalized for the poor choices and fiscal irresponsibility of the minority in the Senate and the stubbornness of the President, and I reluctantly support this bill.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, 2 days ago, this body passed an omnibus appropriations bill that, while limited in its priority only to the most basic domestic needs in this country due to the stubbornness of the President and Republicans in the Senate, funded over a half a trillion dollars for important programs that will help all Americans. Now, however, we are being asked to attach to that bill $70 billion in unchecked, unconditional, and unqualified spending for the war in Iraq. It is absolutely unacceptable that we continue to provide the President with funding without providing explicit requirements that he redeploy our troops from Iraq, bolster our diplomatic efforts throughout the Middle East, and engage other countries in the region in a political solution. For those reasons, I will be voting against this funding. Our soldiers have acted with unquestionable bravery and patriotism in Afghanistan and Iraq. They have given their time, their devotion, and in some cases their lives. And it is time for them to come home. Yet, their military accomplishments are not being complemented with political or diplomatic accomplishments. The Iraqi government refuses to step up to the plate, move toward reconciliation, and unite the Iraqi people. As we prepare to start a new year, it is expected for people to reflect on what has transpired from the past, learn from their mistakes and decide how they can improve in the future. This does not hold true for the President, who instead is blindly demanding unfettered war funds without demonstrating any plans for removing our troops from harm's way and turning Iraq over to the Iraqi people. We cannot and must not continue on this path.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, the continuing tragic situation in Darfur is an attack on humanity and I believe that Congress, that the President, that the international community, and everyone concerned about their fellow men and women has a responsibility to work toward ending this genocide. Local and State governments around this Nation are expressing their outrage over the ongoing genocide, as they should be. S. 2271 encourages these actions by allowing these governments to divest from companies that continue their financial ties with Sudan. As we support these communities as they take a stand, it is vital that the Federal Government do so as well. S. 2271 provides this support by barring Federal contracts with companies doing business with the Sudanese government. Mr. Speaker, the United States must continue to play leadership role in protecting the civilians in Darfur and working towards a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflict. Too many lives have already been lost and this situation will continue to worsen unless we fulfill our commitment by supporting and strengthening the international mission in Darfur.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, the Heroes Earnings and Assistance and Relief Tax (HEART) Act of 2007 is an important piece of legislation that goes a long way toward helping the financial difficulties faced by American soldiers. This bill helps honor those who are serving so bravely during this time of war. The HEART Act would make permanent the inclusion of combat pay as earned income, ensuring that soldiers' families receive much needed tax relief. It also would help thousands of veterans and their families to become homeowners through low-interest home loans, would support those small business employers who continue to pay National Guardsmen and Reservists when they are called to serve, and expands other tax credit and tax relief provisions to help ease any financial difficulties faced by these soldiers. Those who answer the call of duty should be rewarded for their actions by being assured they will not be unduly and negatively affected due to their patriotism. I support this legislation and join the many veterans' organizations in encouraging its passage into law.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, In 2002, we enacted the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act in an attempt to stabilize the economy following the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and to protect against economic catastrophe should another attack occur. This important program is set to expire at the end of the year, and it is essential that we reauthorize TRIA. The legislation before us is not the strong bill we passed in September or the compromise we passed last week, and it is not a perfect bill. It extends TRIA by only 7 years and does not include the strong new provisions that were included in the other bills we passed. However, this legislation does do one vital thing: it works to ensure the stability of our economy should another national crisis occur. For this very important reason, I support this legislation today but hope we can pass a stronger bill in the future.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, when Terry Yates began hunting the ``Sin Nombre'' virus, it was a vague and threatening disease that public health professionals could neither understand nor control. Yates and his collaborators traced the virus to its sources, revealed how it works, and saved lives. Because of his resolve to demystify the deadly illness, today we know how to prevent and treat what is now commonly known as hantavirus. Yates's accomplishment won him awards, but for him it was just the job he wanted to do. From his perch at the University of New Mexico, he devoted his remarkable intellect and passion to saving lives and helping students live their dreams. He loved the thrill of intellectual pursuit. Colleagues noticed that he preferred being out in the field, in hot pursuit of a new discovery. Back on campus, he helped build UNM and connect the university to its community, and he helped a new generation of scientists to get into the field. As we honor his life and contributions today, our thoughts are with Terry's wife Patsy and their sons. He will be missed by the UNM community and all of us who benefited from his intellect and commitment to helping others.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, we stand today on the verge of a new energy horizon, one that promises a more secure America, an America with thousands upon thousands of new manufacturing and high- tech jobs, an America with lower and more stable energy prices, an America at long last responding to the threats of global warming. But this America will only be realized by ushering the legislation before us into law. This bill reflects a bold vision, a vision to respond to many of the gravest threats facing our Nation, a vision befitting the United States Congress, the world's greatest deliberative body. There is much to laud in this legislation. This bill would increase American energy independence, strengthen national security, lower energy costs, grow our economy, and create new jobs, reduce global warming. Now, the focus on the renewable electricity standard provision: a Federal RES is long overdue, and I thank you for your commitment to this provision. Thank you to my Democratic and Republican colleagues who joined me in offering this amendment in August and to the 220 Members who supported its passage. In closing, I would like to remind my colleagues that we are not here to defend the status quo; we are here to lead. We are here to ensure America's standing as a model of ingenuity, creativity, cutting-edge thinking, and revolutionary ideas. Failing to usher this legislation into law I fear will threaten that standing. The renewables revolution which we will be ushering in through this bill and the RES provision is good for business, it is good for the environment, and it is good for the security of our Nation, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, today, we stand on the verge of a new energy horizon. One that promises a more secure America. An America with thousands upon thousands of new manufacturing and high-tech jobs. An America with lower and more stable energy prices. An America at long last responding to the threats of global warming. But this America will only be realized by ushering the legislation before us today into law. This legislation reflects a bold vision. A vision on the scope needed to respond to many of the gravest threats facing our Nation. A vision befitting the United States Congress, the world's greatest deliberative body. There is much to laud in this legislation. The first increase in CAFE requirements in over 30 years, which will save American families an estimated $700 to $1,000 per year at the pump. An historic commitment to American biofuels that will fuel our cars and trucks. And, of great importance to me and my constituents, the inclusion of a renewable electricity standard. An RES, as it is known, requires electric utilities to generate 15 percent of their electricity through renewable resources and energy efficiency measures. I would like to thank the Speaker in particular for her commitment to this provision, the several colleagues who joined me in offering this as an amendment in August, and the 220 Members who supported its passage at that time. Opponents of an RES claim that it would increase electricity costs for consumers. Study after study has shown the contrary. It has consistently been found that a strong Federal RES could actually save American consumers money. A recent study conducted by the Union of Concerned Scientists found an RES would save consumers $13 billion to $18.1 billion on electricity and natural gas bills cumulatively by 2020. In March, the energy consulting firm Wood Mackenzie projected that consumers would save more than $100 billion with an RES in place. They also found that with more diverse energy sources and a decrease in fossil fuel consumption, reduced demand for natural gas would lower prices by as much as 20 percent by 2026. And while consumers are saving money, a Federal RES also helps make our Nation safer and less dependent on foreign sources of energy. Almost all new electricity generation in the last decade has been fueled by natural gas. The biggest sources for future natural gas supplies are Iran, Russia, and Qatar, which together hold 58 percent of the world's natural gas reserves. Increasing the production of domestic energy from biomass, solar, wind, and other renewable sources helps us reduce our dependence on foreign countries, thereby securing America's energy independence. The requirements under this RES start modestly, and increase gradually. It includes many provisions both to help utilities meet the requirements, and to reward those utilities that meet the requirements ahead of schedule. It allows States, many of whom have moved far ahead on this issue, to have standards that are more rigorous. It has support from the business community, the labor community, the faith community, and the environmental community. It is an idea, Madame Speaker--like all included in this legislation--whose time is long overdue. My colleagues, we are not here to defend the status quo. We are here to lead. We are here to make the difficult decisions necessary to ensure America's continued standing as a model of ingenuity, creativity, cutting edge thinking, and revolutionary ideas. Failing to usher this legislation into law will, I fear, threaten that standing. Passing this legislation today should not be considered one of the difficult decisions we have to make. And to those for whom it is a difficult decision, I urge you to join me and the millions of Americans across the country who recognize that the renewables revolution is good for business, is good for the environment, and is good for the security of our Nation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my support for H.R. 3773--the Responsible Electronic Surveillance That is Overseen, Reviewed, and Effective (RESTORE) Act of 2007. In August, Congress unfortunately passed the Protect America Act, a piece of legislation that allowed the surveillance activities of this Administration to go unchecked. Though I opposed that bill, the House was left little choice but to pass that flawed bill. While it is true that modernization of our foreign intelligence laws was necessary to meet the security and intelligence needs of this nation, the Protect America Act went beyond what was essential and instead allowed the continued infringement of American's civil liberties. Thankfully, today we have before us a piece of legislation that gives the intelligence community the authority it needs to protect Americans while also protecting civil liberties that are the bedrock of our nation. This bill modernizes our foreign surveillance system and authorizes necessary funding for training, personnel and technology resources at DOJ, NSA and the FISA Court to expedite the FISA process. Additionally, it ensures that nothing inhibits lawful surveillance for the purpose of protecting the nation and the troops from threats posed by terrorists. Also of great importance, unlike previous bills considered by the House, this bill includes vital checks and balances on the Administration. It prohibits warrantless surveillance of Americans and requires a court order before targeting Americans' phone calls or emails. It also requires a finding of probable cause before conducting surveillance on Americans abroad, which was not required under previous legislation. To ensure greater accountability, the legislation mandates audits on the Administration's warrantless surveillance program and the communications collected under the program. Most importantly, this legislation ensures that it is the courts and not the Administration that decides whether or not an American's communications are targeted. The bill requires the FISA Court to review targeting procedures to ensure that they are reasonably designed to protect Americans and target people outside the United States. It also requires the Court to review the Administration's compliance to ensure that when the government conducts electronic surveillance on Americans, it obtains traditional, individualized warrants from the FISA Court. Mr. Speaker, for far too long this Administration has been able to extend its power and authority, often to the detriment and subversion of our nation's basic principles. Today, we are passing a bill that will finally curb the Administration's actions and restore a measure of accountability that has been sorely lacking for too long. For these reasons, I support the vitally necessary RESTORE Act.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 3074, the FY08 Transportation and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Bill, but to voice my concerns over the lack of a provision omitted from the final conference report. The Conference Report before us today addresses many of the problems facing Americans today. It helps to provide affordable housing for those Americans who need it most and modernizes our transportation infrastructure to enhance safety on our Nation's roads, our railways, and airplanes. This legislation also works to ensure the viability of mass transit operations throughout the Nation, all of which are necessary to reduce traffic congestion, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and reduce our contribution to global warming. This is a strong, essential bill, and I will be supporting its passage, but I would like to express one concern I have with the conference report. As a way to provide Federal housing assistance to tribal members in a way that recognizes self-determination and self-government, Congress enacted the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act and as part of it, the Indian Housing Block Grant, IHBG, program. This program provides an allocation of funds on a formula to help tribes address their housing needs. Beginning in 2000, the Census allowed respondents to claim that they are American Indian Alaska Native in combination with other racial groups, or AIAN only. In response, HUD shifted the basis for the needs portion of the IHBG distribution from single-race to multi-race. This unilateral decision by HUD to change its distribution formula has adversely impacted many of our Nation's tribes, as there was a large shift in funding among NAHASDA recipients. Compounded with the little to no funding increases that Native American housing programs have received in the past several years, tribes and their housing entities have been left without the resources they need to provide housing services for their members. This year's House passed T-HUD appropriations bill recognized that this change has adversely impacted many Native American tribes. Additionally, it directed the GAO to conduct a study to analyze the impact of these funding changes and report its findings to Congress. Unfortunately, the Conference Report removed the language requiring the study. One of the greatest challenges facing Native Americans is the lack of sufficient housing. Approximately 40 percent of on-reservation housing is considered inadequate--often overcrowded and lacking basic facilities, such as electricity and plumbing. The study requested by the House only asked the GAO to study the impact of funding changes on the housing needs of tribal communities, and I do not see how this study could do anything but help. We must have all information possible as we continue to address the need for adequate housing on tribal lands.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, the framers of our Constitution empowered the U.S. House of Representatives to impeach the President in cases of ``treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.'' They gave Congress a sacred responsibility to check the power of the President in order to preserve the liberty of the American people. With this responsibility came an equally important obligation to use congressional power only to advance the interests of the Nation. I am not convinced that an impeachment proceeding is in America's best interests at this time. That is why I recently voted to give the House Judiciary Committee time to substantively consider the articles of impeachment before bringing them before the full House for debate and a vote. At a time when Congress has so much work to do to repair the damage caused by this administration, Congress will best serve the American people by focusing our efforts on ending the war in Iraq, protecting civil liberties from executive overreaching and passing needed legislation to move America in a new direction. With a little over a year left in office, attempting to bring impeachment charges against President Bush, or Vice-President Cheney, at this point, would prove counterproductive to the aggressive agenda our new majority in Congress has put forth. With many issues needing attention, Congress should focus on implementing the agenda the American people elected us to pursue. As part of the new agenda, the 110th Congress has begun to do what the previous Congressional leadership would not do, and what many in this Congress still refuse to do: Stand up to this President. Under Representative Henry Waxman, CA, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has launched more than two dozen investigations of Bush administration actions. The committee's 75 investigators have probed everything from the behavior of contractors in Iraq to the politicization of the Federal Government here at home. Congress's efforts have already led to needed reforms in a variety of executive branch programs. You may recall that in late July, it became apparent to me that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's contradictory statements and actions raised serious concerns about his integrity and his respect for civil liberties. At the same time, Bush administration stonewalling was making it impossible for Congress to fully investigate Gonzales and restore America's respect for the Justice Department. On July 31, 2007, I joined with other former prosecutors serving in the U.S. House in calling for an investigation to determine whether Gonzales should be impeached. At the time, I believed investigation and, potentially, impeachment by the Congress provided the only way to hold Gonzales accountable. In August, Alberto Gonzales did something he should have done long before: He resigned. His resignation provided needed change at the Justice Department, but it did not provide the answers that the American people demand and deserve. Congress still has an obligation to determine the legality of Gonzales's confusing, conflicting and misleading actions and statements. Just this week, Representative John Conyers, MI, took another step towards getting the truth about the Justice Department's actions under Gonzales. Conyers demanded the White House release key information regarding the Justice Department's firing of Federal prosecutors or face a congressional contempt citation. I and my colleagues will do everything in our power to compel the White House to cooperate with our investigation. I will continue to work with my colleagues to uncover the truth about the Gonzales Justice Department and its treatment of Americans' civil liberties, and I will fight to hold this administration accountable. While Congress exercises its oversight role, we must also support a framework of laws that protects Americans from violations of our liberties and our right to privacy. I have always defended civil liberties. In 2001, I joined just 65 of my colleagues in standing up to post- 9/11 fearmongering and voting against the USA PATRIOT ACT. I have cosponsored legislation to restore the right of habeas corpus and undo the Military Commissions Act. And, most recently, I opposed changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, that would have given this administration more power to spy on Americans. The Bush administration has done real damage to the United States through its policies and its executive actions. Congress must respond in the manner that will most effectively protect the American people and promote the interests of our country. We have begun to rein in the president and restore integrity to the Federal Government. We will continue to do so.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 744 and in honor of this country's Native American veterans. For well over 200 years, Native Americans have provided military and strategic service to the U.S., acting as patriotic soldiers and standing side-by-side their fellow citizens in defense of our country. There are nearly 200,000 Native American veterans in the U.S. today, including members of every single tribe and pueblo. In New Mexico, there are countless stories of heroic Native American men and women serving in uniform. I am proud to have sponsored earlier legislation to honor Native American veterans. During the 106th Congress, I introduced a bill to honor the Navajo Code Talkers with the Congressional Gold Medal in honor of their dedicated service during World War II. These brave interpreters used their native tongue to carefully transmit confidential Allied messages regarding the movement and strategy of millions of fellow soldiers. Not once was their code broken. Sixty years after their service, these men were honored in the Capitol Rotunda with the Congressional Gold Medal. This past Congress, I was privileged to sponsor a measure to allow Native American tribes to be eligible for grants to establish state veterans cemeteries on tribal land. This long overdue legislation ensures that those Native American veterans who desire to be buried at home will not have their final wishes denied. I was happy that it was passed and am encouraged that we will soon see the first state veterans cemetery locate on tribal land. To date, 47 Native Americans have given their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq. We honor their memory and their sacrifice by ensuring the Native American veterans who return home and granted the respect they deserve. As we approach Veterans Day later this week, we must remember that Native American have served our nation with pride, and continue to put on the uniform with bravery, honor, and dignity. I urge all of my colleagues to thank all veterans for their service, and to recognize the considerable sacrifice given by our country's Native Americans.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to mark the passage of H.R. 2262, the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act. H.R. 2262 takes long overdue action to reform the 1872 Mining Act. That law, the General Mining Act of 1872, was written to encourage westward expansion and to generate the supply of minerals needed in our Nation. Back in 1872, a charge of $5 an acre to mine hard rock minerals in remote areas of the undeveloped west was probably a pretty fair price. The fact that the price is still the same today is simply ludicrous. As a result, private companies, both domestic and foreign, have been able to profit handsomely by mining on public lands without the need to pay the American people any royalties or to even clean up the messes they leave behind. By some estimates, the antiquated 1872 Mining Act has allowed over $245 billion worth of minerals to be extracted from more than 3.4 million acres of public lands without returning to the American people, the owners of those lands, a single cent in royalties. Today, we took a necessary step toward bringing this policy into the modern era. H.R. 2262, introduced by Representative Nick Rahall, the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, requires mining companies to pay royalties to the American people for the minerals they mine from public lands and to properly reclaim lands damaged by mining. It also allows for the prohibition of mining on environmentally sensitive lands, and it creates a fund to begin the clean up of nearly a half million abandoned mine sites. I sincerely hope that the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act sees swift passage in the other Chamber so we can send it to the President to be signed into law. Even though we have already waited 135 years to take action on this matter, time is truly of the essence. In 1872, hardrock mining mostly took place in the middle of vast undeveloped lands. Today, however, with over 375,000 mining claims spread throughout the rapidly developing West, some of our last pieces of unspoiled lands are threatened. According to the New York Times, many of those 375,000 claims are within 5 miles of 11 major national parks, including Death Valley and the Grand Canyon. Over 89,000 of those claims were staked in 2006, largely due to the renewed interest in nuclear energy and the concomitant increase in the price of uranium. In New Mexico alone, almost 2,000 claims were staked in 2006. Many New Mexicans, most particularly members of the Navajo Nation, have already suffered devastating injuries from uranium mining in the past. H.R. 2262 will bring some much needed balance to the use of our public lands and, in so doing, help protect the health of our citizens. I am proud to support Chairman Rahall's efforts and I encourage our colleagues in the other Chamber to do the same.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, I rise today with my colleague from Pennsylvania, Mr. English, to introduce the Promotion of Artistic Giving Act of 2007, legislation that would amend recently enacted limitations on the donation of fractional gifts with more measured restrictions. Fractional gifts are charitable donations to museums and galleries of partial interests in art or other collectibles that confer a substantial public benefit while permitting a tax benefit over an extended period of time. Like all qualified charitable gifts, the taxpayer receives an income tax deduction of up to 30 percent of his or her adjusted gross income for the donation to the charitable institution--in this case, museums. Fractional gifts are a valuable tool for many taxpayers due to the value of the art or collectible being donated as the value of the gift is far in excess of the amount of the available deduction. The benefit of these types of donations is that many fractional gifts would never be given to a museum without the potential donor being able to participate in an extended gift-giving program. While well intentioned, the unnecessarily harsh provisions relating to fractional giving included in the Pension Protection Act of 2006, PPA, have effectively ceased charitable donations of partial interests in art to our Nation's museums and galleries. In trying to close a tax loophole, the PPA suffocated a time-honored method of giving that has made many of our national treasures such as the Hope Diamond and Vincent Van Gogh's ``White Roses'' available to the public. By rolling back some of the most restrictive provisions of the PPA, this legislation strikes the right balance between tax and charitable giving policy, addresses concerns about tax evasion, removes fractional giving from estate and gift tax provisions, and again encourages lifetime donations of art for the enjoyment of the public. Since the passage of the PPA, fractional giving has dramatically decreased. For instance, a Santa Fe, New Mexico, museum had a potential donor of a tribal folk art collection worth approximately $2 million withdraw an offer to give the collection to the museum. Similarly, a potential fractional gift of an important body of work from a well- known Pennsylvania artist has been withheld as a result of the change in law. The PPA made two dramatic changes to the income tax deduction benefits available to donors. First, donors of appreciating artwork are now limited on all contributions to the fair market value determined at the time of the donation of the initial fractional gift. Second, donors are now required to complete the fractional gift within a 10-year period. Combined, these changes negated much of the tax benefits for donating a fractional gift of valuable pieces of artwork and need to be modified. This legislation would slightly modify these provisions to require taxpayers to get a certified appraisal from the Art Advisory Board at IRS for gifts of over $1 million and require gifts be completed during the life of the donor. These modest changes will address congressional concerns about valuation of gifts and unlimited time periods for gifts while providing the necessary incentives for these types of charitable donations. Unfortunately, the PPA also modified estate and gift tax rules for fractional gifts. These rules have proven to be unworkable and unnecessary. The abuses of fractional giving involved the income tax deduction, not any reduction in estate or gift taxes. Modifying the estate and gift tax laws based on valuation and recapture rules applied for income tax purposes will result in unfair outcomes for taxpayers. Unless these rules are modified taxpayers of completed gifts could have estate tax liability on an asset that is no longer in their estate or have gift tax liability on gifts that were never made. For these reasons, our legislation essentially removes the changes made in PPA to estate and gift tax rules for fractional gifts. Our Nation has a wealth of culture and creativity. Museums are the venue through which individuals can learn from, engage in, and enjoy history, culture, and art. Our bill will encourage the transfer of museum quality pieces from individuals to public institutions. I look forward to working with my colleagues on swift passage of this important legislation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, it is no secret that health care costs in the United States are sharply increasing. Nor is it any longer a surprise to hear that the rate of chronic illnesses and diseases has been on the rise. Left unabated, the continuing rise in both preventable illnesses and health care costs will put even more pressure on our already fragile health care system and threatens to bankrupt our Federal budget. These trends also have alarming implications for employers, both directly in terms of costs for employer-provided health care plans and indirectly through higher rates of absenteeism. With all of these concerns in mind, I rise today to introduce the Healthy Workforce Act of 2007. In so doing, I am pleased to be joined by my colleague from California, Representative Mary Bono. I would also like to thank Senator Harkin, who is truly a leader on preventive health care issues, and who is the original sponsor of this legislation in the Senate. The Healthy Workforce Act of 2007 provides a tax credit to businesses that offer comprehensive wellness programs to their employees, thereby promoting prevention of high cost chronic diseases. This tax credit will encourage business to raise health awareness through health education and health risk assessments. It will promote a supportive environment to encourage employee participation in workplace wellness programs, through offering meaningful incentive to participating employees, such as a reduction in health insurance premiums. And it will encourage employees to lead a healthy lifestyle through counseling, seminars or on-line programs. Keeping workers healthy in the first place can go a long way to reducing the growing health care costs to employers. And Madam Speaker, these increasing costs are significant to employers. Average employer medical costs increased 72 percent between 2000 and 2006. Some companies report spending more than 50 percent of their profits to cover these expenses. Employers are also increasingly bearing costs of diet-related chronic disease and obesity. For example, obesity-related health conditions cost employers approximately $33 billion in health care and other indirect costs. However, proactive treatment would significantly reduce costs. The proactive treatment of hypertension costs about $1,000 per year, whereas treatment for a heart attack costs a minimum of $50,000, not including the costs which result from the time off and loss of productivity. Employer spending on health promotion and chronic disease prevention is a good investment in our future. And this legislation targets primarily smaller and mid-sized companies who would otherwise have difficulty making the initial investment needed to support such programs. Workplace wellness programs are economical, averaging $30 to $200 per employee and studies have reported a proven rate of return on investment within 12 to 18 months, ranging from $2 to $10 for each dollar invested. Adaptable lifestyle factors such as smoking, sedentary lifestyle, poor nutrition, unmanaged stress, and obesity account for approximately half of premature deaths in the United States. Spending on chronic diseases related to lifestyle and other preventable diseases accounts for an estimated 75 percent of total healthcare spending and it is estimated that by 2014 our country's total health care expenditures will be $3.6 trillion. Clearly we cannot continue down this path. We must shift the focus of our nation's health care system to prevention and wellness programs. In so doing, we can reduce health care costs, improve health, improve quality of life, and boost productivity. Unfortunately, a very small percentage of health care spending is devoted to health promotion. The national investment in prevention is currently estimated to be less than 5 percent of annual health care costs. Our Nation needs a new approach to healthcare--one that puts prevention front and center. The Healthy Workforce Act is one piece of the larger reform needed to our Nation's health care system. But it is a critical piece. By providing incentives for America's businesses to provide wellness programs for employees, they and their employees can focus on chronic disease prevention and health promotion, reduce health care costs, boost productivity, and improve the health and quality of life of working Americans. I urge my colleagues to join me in seeking a more effective approach to preventing chronic diseases and providing incentives for employers and employees facing rising health care costs by cosponsoring the Healthy Workforce Act.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, the Iranian government continues to defy the international community in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. In the past, it denounced United Nations Security Council Resolutions imposing sanctions as ``illegal'' and ``invalid.'' And just this week, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke before the U.N. General Assembly and announced that the nuclear issue in Iran was closed. It is obvious to all of us that Iran's nuclear development programs are a concern for our Nation. Our Nation's security would be greatly affected by Iranian control over any nuclear weapons. However, we must not forget that, in addition to its disregard for the international community, the regime in place has abhorrent civil liberties and human rights practices within Iran. In the past 5 years, hundreds of newspapers have been closed, hundreds of pro-reform websites have been blocked, and innumerable people have been unjustly imprisoned. Just this year, Dr. Haleh Esfandiari, an Iranian-American, was jailed for months for unsubstantiated accusations that she was trying to set up networks of Iranians to start a revolution to bring down the government. In fact, she has long been an advocate for building bridges between the United States and the Middle East. While Dr. Esfandiari has been released, countless others have not, and it is clear that we must work to stop these baseless and ruthless actions. While we address our ongoing concerns, we must be vigilant in ensuring that the United States works with the international community and approaches the Middle East diplomatically. As our Nation has learned, we must be willing to do everything that is necessary to protect our Nation and its people; however, we must not preemptively strike other sovereign nations because of incomplete and questionable information. What we must all agree on is that Iranian nuclear capability must continue to be investigated, discussed, and debated-- throughout this Congress, the Nation, and the world. Nonetheless, while we attempt to address these situations diplomatically, these actions must be backed by strong sanctions against the regime in Tehran. It is with this knowledge that I support H.R. 1400, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007. This legislation, first and foremost, declares the support of diplomatic and economic means to resolve the Iranian nuclear situation, calls for enhanced U.N. Security Council efforts, and explicitly states that nothing authorizes the use of force in Iran. Additionally, the bill expands bilateral sanctions against Iran, prohibits the Presidential waiver of these sanctions, and increases oversight of the Administration's efforts. While critics of this legislation may consider these actions to be inflammatory, I instead see it as a necessary and diplomatic step that must be taken. Iran has long flouted its disregard for the international community and it must understand that it cannot pursue a nuclear weapons program and ignore international law without facing international political and economic repercussions.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's yielding to me and appreciate his hard work in the committee. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a commonsense amendment that will better ensure the safety of our Nation's citizens, both in the air and on the ground. In my district last November, in a situation that is unfortunately still far too common, a drunk driving accident resulted in the deaths of a mother, a father and three children. Left behind in Las Vegas, New Mexico, is one sole-surviving child. The family of six was on their way home from a soccer match when their minivan was struck by a drunk driver speeding down the wrong side of the interstate. As the investigation unfolded, we learned that only a few hours earlier, the drunk driver was already visibly intoxicated on an airline flight to New Mexico. While other passengers noticed that the man appeared to be intoxicated, he was served more alcohol on board the flight. Just 2 hours after deplaning with a blood alcohol content four times the legal limit, the man took to the highway, killing this family and himself. In the aftermath of this horrible tragedy, I learned that Federal regulations prohibit an intoxicated person both from boarding a plane, as well as drinking during a flight. However, the airlines are not required to train their flight attendants on how to identify intoxicated passengers. In order to help prevent a problem from occurring, those in charge must first be able to identify the warning signs. Adequate training to identify and deal with intoxicated passengers is critical to ensuring attendants make informed decisions when serving alcohol. My amendment works to ensure airline personnel receive this training. It requires airline carriers to provide gate and flight attendants with alcohol-server training to help them recognize intoxicated persons. As New Mexico's Attorney General, I helped implement this training in the service industry, because research shows this knowledge is critical to combating the problem. Training would occur annually and would also provide situational training on how to handle inebriated individuals who are belligerent. The intention of my amendment is to prevent drunk driving, but it does much more. While inebriated passengers pose a danger once they deplane and drive, they also pose a danger during flight. It is no secret that when too much alcohol is involved, tempers are more likely to flare, individuals are more likely to behave inappropriately, and decision-making skills are drastically impaired. For all of these reactions to alcohol, flight attendants must have training on how to handle those people. It is a commonsense approach for the safety of all people in flight. Unfortunately, my amendment cannot prohibit all tragic drunk driving accidents from occurring, but it will implement a system to make it more difficult for passengers over the legal limit from boarding planes, deplaning and driving home. Training to identify intoxicated passengers is critical to ensuring that the attendants make informed decisions when allowing people to board a flight and when deciding whether to serve them alcohol.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, we must see that flight attendants are trained in a way that allows us to ensure the safety of those people in their care, our Nation's fliers. But this amendment can do much more. It may also help to ensure the safety of those who were nowhere near the airplane. My amendment cannot prevent every tragedy that comes from alcohol abuse, but it is one more valuable step we can take. I am pleased to note that my amendment has the support of the Association of Flight Attendants and Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and I would like to include for the Record letters from them of support. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Irving, TX, September 20, 2007. Hon. Tom Udall, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Udall: I write in support of your amendment to H.R. 2881, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2007. Your amendment seeks to address a potentially serious problem taking place in our skies. On more than one occasion I have read about an airline passenger who has had too much to drink and then driven after the flight. The Udall amendment seeks to provide proper training to flight attendants with regard to serving alcohol as well as how to address passengers who have had too much to drink. For this reason, MADD supports your amendment. According to the latest NHTSA study, in 2006 more than 13,000 people died in alcohol related crashes with a blood alcohol content of .08 or greater. Drunk driving continues to be the leading cause of traffic fatalities in the country. You may be interested to know that in 2006, MADD launched the campaign to eliminate drunk driving. The campaign consists of four points: Intensive high-visibility law enforcement, including twice- yearly crackdowns and frequent enforcement efforts that include sobriety checkpoints and saturation patrols in all 50 states. Full implementation of current alcohol ignition interlock technologies, including efforts to require alcohol ignition interlock devices for all convicted drunk drivers. A key part of this effort is working with judges, prosecutors and state driver's license officials to stop the revolving door of repeat offenders. Exploration and development of advanced vehicle-based technology that will detect if a driver has an illegal alcohol level of .08 BAC or above and prevent that driver from operating the vehicle. Mobilization of grassroots efforts, led by over 400 MADD affiliates. Again, thank you for your efforts to address excessive drinking on airline flights and best wishes as you pursue your amendment. Best wishes. Sincerely, Glynn Birch, President.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to correct an outdated tax law that is forcing a husband and wife of almost 30 years from my district to live thousands of miles apart during what should be the golden years of their retirement together. In introducing this legislation, however, I seek to not only assist my constituents who have brought this inequity to my attention, but also to assist any other families facing the same problem. Madam Speaker, I first introduced this legislation during the 109th Congress. I also had an opportunity to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures last Congress. Unfortunately that was as far as my bill progressed. Today, however, I introduce this legislation with great optimism for, and a continued commitment to, its passage. At issue is what I believe is an outdated provision of the tax code that is preventing one of my constituents, Mrs. Novella Wheaton Nied, a U.S. citizen and native New Mexican, from enjoying her retirement years with her husband Veit Nied, a German citizen. The Nieds have been married almost 30 years and have lived overseas in various countries for the length of their marriage until September 2001. Mr. Nied, an economist, retired in September 2001 from the European Commission in Brussels, Belgium. The couple decided to return to Taos, New Mexico, Novella's home, for their retirement years, but learned upon Veit's approval of permanent resident status in the United States that his pension from the European Commission would be subject to double taxation--the initial tax by the European Commission, and again by the U.S. should he choose to make his residency here. Double taxation on his pension will create a hardship for the Nieds in their retirement--both financially and emotionally. As a result, Mr. Nied did not accept the permanent resident status and has been traveling back and forth between Germany and the United States, being very cognizant and diligent about following U.S. immigration and taxation laws, and therefore has not stayed longer than 120 days per annum in the United States, which would render him liable for taxes in this country. This unfortunate living situation has been ongoing since 2001 when they learned of the double taxation and have been seeking a solution that would allow them to once again live together. The United States has tax agreements with many countries to prevent double taxation, as well as provisions in the tax code that allow resident aliens who pay taxes to a foreign country to claim the foreign tax credit that reduces their U.S. income taxes. Unfortunately, the EU does not qualify as a foreign country for purposes of the foreign tax credit. The bill I introduce today amends the Internal Revenue Code to treat employment taxes paid to the European Union by employees of the European Union as income taxes paid to a foreign country, for purposes of the foreign tax credit. This bill will allow Mr. Nied, and others in his situation, to qualify for the foreign tax credit. This is a simple bill that brings a section of the tax code up to date with the changes in international political institutions. While it certainly will help Mr. and Mrs. Nied, this legislation will also help other families who face the same situation. The sooner we pass this legislation, the sooner the Nieds, and others, can be reunited and enjoy their retirement years in the company of their loved ones.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, our nation prides itself on establishing monuments and memorials in remembrance of the past. We shape marble, bronze, granite and stone into physical commemorations, hoping that they will reflect particular ideals of justice, principles, and beliefs from our country's history and encourage those who visit to embody the same ideals. Twenty-five years ago, the Nation found itself dedicating a memorial to a war that was bitterly fought both at home and abroad and trying to find within that memorial the peace and solace that had been elusive for so long. The memorial design created by 21-year-old Yale University undergraduate Maya Lin, and managed by the National Park Service, wrought emotional reactions from the crowd when it was dedicated in November 1982. Thousands of veterans, regardless of their personal feelings on what the war had meant to them, found themselves moved by the Wall. Their faces reflected against the names of the dead etched into the black granite, visitors found that this memorial was not simply a standing block of stone, but instead was a moving tribute that refused to separate the past from the present, merging the two and forcing them to coalesce into a semblance of calm. Now 25 years later we continue to see the effect of the memorial. Families and friends leave at the base of the memorial personal belongings of those whose names lie above. Boisterous crowds traveling noisily from monument to monument fall silent when entering the cut of earth that starts the Wall, their eyes skipping from name to name, recognition on their face that each one represents an individual who gave their life for their country. And those who fought and returned home see the names of fellow soldiers, an attempt not to justify or explain those losses, but simply to honor and remember them. Early this month, the Wall was vandalized and the face of the granite desecrated. While long-term damage is not expected, this act of dishonor flies in the face of what the memorial represents. I hope that every single one of my colleagues will join me in denouncing those who committed this vandalism. With each new year the wounds of the Vietnam War further heal, the passage of time helping to wear away the dissonance and divide. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial plays a large role in this process, bringing us together not only to remember what occurred and what was lost, but also to ensure that we do not forget. It is fitting that we commemorate the anniversary of this memorial and again offer the grateful thanks of our Nation to those who served.