Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, according to GAO we are $5.3 trillion deep in publicly held debt, and have an estimated $54.3 trillion in unfunded promised benefits if we don't change our current course. The Social Security and Medicare Trustees reports recently issued only reinforce the dire condition of our fiscal health. This is a fundamental issue for our country's economic future. It's also a generational issue. Pete Peterson's commentary in Newsweek last week ends by quoting Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German pastor who was instrumental in the resistance movement against Nazism. He said, ``The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world it leaves to its children.'' I can't help but wonder what sort of future today's partisan Washington is leaving generations to come. If we can come together-- both sides of the aisle--we can ensure that our children and grandchildren have all the opportunity you and I have had. The bipartisan Cooper-Wolf SAFE Commission could give this country a chance to get back on track--to rein in entitlement spending. If there are other bipartisan ideas on how to address this issue, we should talk about those too. Doing nothing is simply not an option. I urge Congressional leadership and Treasury Secretary Paulson to embrace the Cooper-Wolf legislation.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise to express my ongoing concern about China. I strongly believe that America must be a country that stands up for basic decency and human rights. America must speak out on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves--men and women who are being persecuted for their religious or political beliefs. Our foreign policy must be a policy that helps promote human rights and freedom, and not a policy that sides with dictators who oppress their own citizens. Every person on earth has certain inalienable rights. In a 1987 Constitution Day speech, Ronald Reagan noted that the U.S. Constitution has been described ``as a kind of covenant. It is a covenant we've made not only with ourselves but with all of mankind.'' Reagan continued that ``It's a human covenant; yes, and beyond that, a covenant with the Supreme Being to whom our Founding Fathers did constantly appeal for assistance.'' America has a profound responsibility to keep this covenant and to stand up for freedom in the world's darkest corners. China is a perfect example of a place where these rights are not being protected. The China of today is worse than the China of yesterday, or of last year, or of the last decade. China is not progressing. It is regressing. It is more violent, more repressive, and more resistant to democratic values than ever before. China is actively engaged in espionage against the United States. I recently had the opportunity to read the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission's 2007 Classified Report to the Congress, and found the report's conclusions to be very alarming. The unclassified version of this report is available at www.usce eov. I strongly urge you to read it, as it gives a clear picture of the threat that China poses to our national security. The report addresses Chinese activities in the areas of espionage, cyber warfare, and arms proliferation. The FBI has described Chinese espionage as a ``substantial threat'' and the Bureau of Customs and Border Patrol has reported publicly that Chinese espionage is now the leading threat to U.S. technology. It has also been widely reported that many cyber attacks against the U.S. government are suspected of originating in China. Furthermore, China continues to transfer weapons and technology to nations of concern and non-state actors, putting men and women in American uniform abroad in grave danger. You may have also seen the April 3 Washington Post article titled, ``Chinese Spy `Slept' in U.S. for Two Decades,'' which details the spying activities of Chi Mak. Mak lived quietly with his family in a Los Angeles suburb for two decades while he built his career around secretly copying sensitive plans for Navy weapons, submarines and ships and couriering them to the Chinese government. U.S. intelligence and Justice Department officials believe the Mak case ``represents only a small facet of a [Chinese] intelligence-gathering operation that has long been in place and is growing in size and sophistication.'' I have enclosed a copy of this article for your review. China also poses a deadly threat to its own citizens. Manfred Nowak, the UN Special Rapporteur for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, has found that Chinese officials specifically target house church groups. Falun Gong adherents, Tibetans, and Uyghur prisoners and abuse them. The Cardinal Kung Foundation reports that in 2007, 35 Roman Catholic bishops were in jail, under house arrest, or harassed and put under surveillance. The Chinese government has refused to acknowledge the Vatican as the supreme authority for Chinese Catholics in many matters of faith. More information on the Chinese government's persecution of the Catholic Church can be found at www.cardinalkungfoundation.org. In 2007, the Chinese government arrested 693 Christians that we know of. The China Aid Association reports that in 2007 the known cases in which Christian house churches were persecuted by the government covered 18 provinces and one municipality directly under the jurisdiction of the Central Government and there were 60 cases of persecution, up 30.4% from that of 2006. You can read more about China's persecution of Christians at http://chinaaid.org. Muslims and Buddhists face persecution by the Chinese government as well. Renowned human rights advocate and Uyghur Muslim Rebiya Kadeer has watched from exile as the Chinese government arrests and beats her family members in her homeland. In late 2006, western mountain climbers captured on videotape a horrifying scene: Chinese police shooting from their North Face tents at a group of Tibetan refugees crossing Nangpa Pass. A 17-year old Buddhist nun was killed and several others were wounded. Additional information on the persecution of Muslims, Buddhists, Falun Gong practitioners and other minorities can be found in the State Department's annual human rights report at http:// www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100518.htm. According to the State Department's 2007 human rights report, China has 20 ankang institutions (high-security psychiatric hospitals for the criminally insane) directly administered by the Ministry of Public Security. People that are committed to these institutions have no mechanism for objecting to public security officials' determinations of mental illness. The Chinese government often houses dissidents in these institutions, beating them, giving them medicine against their will, forcibly subjecting them to electric shock treatment and denying them food and the use of toilet facilities. According to the State Department's human rights report, political activists, underground religious believers, members of the banned China Democratic Party (CDP), and Falun Gong practitioners are among the people incarcerated in these facilities. China maintains an extensive system of gulags--slave labor camps, also known as the ``laogai''--as large as that which existed in the former Soviet Union. These camps are used for brainwashing and ``reeducation through labor,'' and are often the site of barbaric procedures of organ harvesting, torture, and execution. During a trip to China in March 1991, I visited Beijing Prison No. I and witnessed forced labor first-hand. In late 2005, I introduced H. Con. Res. 294, a resolution condemning the Laogai prison camps, which passed in the House by a vote of 413-1. China has a long history of attempts to liquidate Tibet's culture and presence in China, including in the recent crackdown in which scores of Tibetans were killed and hundreds more arrested for participating in the protests. My outrage at what China is doing in Tibet led me to visit Tibet in 1997. I have continued since then to speak out on behalf of the persecuted and suffering in Tibet and about the human rights abuses that I have witnessed first-hand there. I was disappointed in the State Department's decision in March to remove China from its list of the world's 10 worst human rights violators, especially given State's own admission of China's poor human rights record in its annual human rights report. I also remain deeply troubled by the President's decision to attend the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. It is time to send China a message that the United States is serious when we tell the Chinese government that it needs to end the human rights and religious freedom abuses in its own country. China poses a threat to freedom in other countries as well. China, which is a major business partner of Sudan, should be using its influence with the Sudanese government to bring an end to the genocide in the Darfur region. Instead, Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to Khartoum early in 2007 did not produce progress on this point, but rather a commitment by the Chinese to build Sudanese President Bashir a new palace. China's role in extracting oil from Sudan, selling weapons to the Sudanese government and maintaining close business relations with this genocidal regime are clearly more important to the Chinese government than saving human lives. China also cuts corners with its exports, making products that pose significant danger to consumers around the world. Recent Chinese exports to our country--and to many others--have included tainted pet food that has killed our pets, dried apples in cancer-causing chemicals, scallops and sardines coated with putrefying bacteria, children's toys containing lead-based paint, and prunes tinted with chemical dyes, prompting U.S. Food and Drug Administration inspectors to travel across the world to investigate two suspect Chinese factories, only to find the factories had been cleaned out and all equipment dismantled. Chinese products also poison children in Panama, the Dominican Republic, and Australia, with toothpaste containing an industrial solvent and prime ingredient in some antifreeze. This toothpaste was marketed under the brand name ``Mr. Cool.'' Several years ago, during the debate over granting China permanent normal trade relations status, proponents argued that economic liberalization would lead to political liberalization in China, and that the U.S. and other industrialized nations could influence China through economic activity to better respect the rights of its citizens to fundamental human rights. I strongly opposed Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status for China, and today we have seen why the protection of basic liberties should not come second to economic growth. China is more violent, repressive, and resistant to democratic values than it was before we opened our ports to freely accept Chinese products. And despite all of these abhorrent acts. China was still awarded the honor of hosting the 2008 Olympics. The Olympic Games: an event designed to lift up ``the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles,'' according to its own charter. Does China's behavior sound like a ``good example'' to the rest of the world? Or that it is reflecting ``fundamental ethical principles'' that all nations should aspire to? It is because of these actions I have described that I do not support the president or other senior U.S. officials attending the 2008 Beijing Olympics. The political prisoners in China and Chinese dissidents around the world will be deeply demoralized by what the Chinese government will surely portray as symbolic support for its regime if senior American officials attend the games. I have proposed language for inclusion in the 2008 emergency supplemental appropriations bill that would prohibit U.S. federal employees from attending the Olympics on the taxpayer's dime. Some assert that human rights will come to China once stability has been attained. They say that protection of human rights is secondary to attaining economic power and wealth. We must reject that notion. China poses a threat not only to its own citizens, but to the entire world. The United States government must be vigilant about protecting the values of human rights, religious freedom and democracy that we hold dear.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. In his first speech in the British Parliament in 1789 describing the slave trade, William Wilberforce concluded telling his colleagues this, he said, ``Having heard all of this, you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say you did not know.'' Not one Member of the 110th Congress can say they do not know about the Nation's long-term financial outlook which former Comptroller General David Walker said will ``result in a tsunami of spending and debt that could swamp our ship of state.'' According to the Government Accountability Office, America is $5.3 trillion deep in publicly held debt and has estimated $54.3 trillion in unfunded promised benefits if we don't change our current course. And that is trillions with a ``T.'' The Social Security Medicare Trustees Report recently issued only reinforces the dire condition of our fiscal health. The Medicare Trustees Report concluded that consideration of reforms to ensure the financial security of Medicare must occur, stating, ``the sooner the solutions are enacted, the more flexible and gradual they can be.'' The Social Security report echoes this sense of urgency, saying, ``The projected trust fund deficits should be addressed in a timely manner. Making adjustments sooner will allow them to be spread over more generations.'' And if those dire projections are not enough to raise the warning flags, couple those with the fact that the value of the dollar is falling through the floor. What more evidence do we need to realize that our children and grandchildren cannot afford to have their leaders choose to look the other way? I was so disappointed that Treasury Secretary Paulson's focus is not on this issue. I told him today when he testified before the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee that I believe he is one of the most qualified Treasury Secretaries our Nation has had. He has a brilliant mind, but his attention isn't on the most fundamental of all issues, the economic future of America. I was also disappointed that he didn't answer my question about the projections credible rating agencies, such as Moody's Investment Service, are making about the U.S. triple-A bond rating being at risk as early as year 2012. I also asked Secretary Paulson what the ramifications of this loss would be. He didn't answer that question either. Just last week, Congressman Jim Cooper and I sat in on a roundtable discussion held by Maya MacGuineas and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, and they have done a great job. It was just such a diverse group from the business, finance and policy communities, former CBO directors, former OMB directors, think tanks, political views across the spectrum, the Heritage Foundation and the Brookings Institution included. Almost everyone expressed concern about the entitlement crisis we are facing. This is not only an economic issue, it is also generational and a moral issue. You may have read Pete Peterson's editorial in Newsweek this week. He ended by quoting Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German pastor who was instrumental in the resistance movement against fascist Germany. He said, ``The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world it leaves to its children.'' I cannot help but wonder what sort of future today's partisan Washington is leaving to generations to come. If we can come together, both sides of the aisle, we can ensure that our children and our grandchildren have all the opportunity that you and I have had. Jim Cooper and I are working together on the Cooper-Wolf SAFE Commission, with over 80 bipartisan cosponsors. If anyone has another viable plan to address our entitlement tsunami, we're anxious to hear it. But we cannot continue the status quo. Doing nothing is not acceptable. Wilberforce's admonition rings as true today as it did in 1789. ``Having heard all this, you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say that you do not know.'' We know, and it's on our watch. Let's fix it.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise to express my deep concern over the recent crackdown in Tibet by the Chinese government. I strongly believe that America must be a country that speaks out on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves--men and women who are being persecuted for their religious or political beliefs. Every person on earth has certain inalienable rights. In a 1987 Constitution Day speech, Ronald Reagan noted that the U.S. Constitution has been described ``as a kind of covenant. It is a covenant we've made not only with ourselves but with all of mankind.'' America has a profound responsibility to keep this covenant and to stand up for freedom in the world's darkest corners. China is a perfect example of a place where these rights are not being protected. The China of today is worse than the China of yesterday, or of last year, or of the last decade. China is not progressing. It is regressing. It is more violent, more repressive, and more resistant to democratic values than ever before. The Cardinal Kung Foundation reports that in 2007, 35 Roman Catholic bishops were in jail, under house arrest, or harassed and put under surveillance. In 2007, the Chinese government arrested 693 Christians that we know of. Renowned human rights advocate and Uyghur Muslim Rebiya Kadeer has watched from exile as the Chinese government arrests and beats her family members in her homeland. Since the crackdown on Falun Gong began in 1999, untold numbers of Falun Gong practitioners have been arrested, imprisoned and tortured. The Tibetans have suffered terribly over the years at the hands of the Chinese government. Tibet is gradually, but brutally, being subsumed by China. Inch by inch, this region, its people, its culture, its religion, even its language is growing fainter and fainter and could one day disappear as the Chinese government persists in trying to liquidate Tibetan culture and presence in China. The reports and images of this most recent crackdown in Tibet are deeply disturbing. Tibetan Buddhist monks and Tibetan youth have been beaten down in the street and rounded up in house-to-house searches for protesting China's rule of the Tibet region. Scores of Tibetans are believed to have been killed in the violence, and hundreds of Tibetans have been arrested by Chinese police for participating in protests. Given this legacy of violence and discrimination by the Chinese government, I'm not surprised it would crack down with such brutal force against these Tibetan protestors. My outrage at what China is doing in Tibet led me to visit Tibet in 1997, and I have seen first- hand the repression the Tibetans live under. And despite all of its abhorrent acts, China was still awarded the honor of hosting the 2008 Olympics. The Olympic Games are an event designed to lift up ``the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles,'' according to its own charter. Does China's behavior sound like a ``good example'' to the rest of the world? Or that it is reflecting ``fundamental ethical principles'' that all nations should aspire to? It is because of China's actions that I cannot support the President or other senior U.S. officials attending the 2008 Beijing Olympics. While I have strenuously urged the President not to attend the Olympics, I know I cannot stop the President from going. But I am offering language in the 2008 emergency supplemental appropriations bill to prohibit U.S. government officials and employees from attending the Beijing Olympics on the taxpayers' dime. The political prisoners in China and Chinese dissidents around the world will be deeply demoralized by what the Chinese government will surely portray as symbolic support for its regime if senior American officials attend the games. Some say that the protection of human rights is secondary to attaining economic power and wealth. We must reject that notion. China poses a threat not only to its own citizens, but to the entire world.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, in his first speech in the British Parliament in 1789 describing the slave trade, William Wilberforce concluded by telling his colleagues this: ``Having heard all of this you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say you did not know.'' None of us can say that we do not know about the Nation's long-term financial outlook, which former Comptroller General David Walker said will result in a tsunami of spending debt level that will swamp our ship of state. It is time that this Congress and this administration and Secretary Paulson wake up to the massive debt that we are amassing. Congressman Jim Cooper and I are working together on a bipartisan plan called the SAFE Commission, where 78 colleagues are with us. If there are other bipartisan solutions that you all have, put them on the table and let's get them discussed. It will take the leadership on a Wilberforce level from both sides of the aisle. We know what is happening, and for the sake of our children and our grandchildren, we must not look the other way. Wilberforce said, and I close, having heard all of this, you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say you did not know.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5489, to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 6892 Main Street in Gloucester, Virginia, as the ``Congresswoman Jo Ann S. Davis Post Office.'' I would like to thank Congressman Rob Wittman for introducing this legislation to honor the memory of our colleague and friend. Congresswoman Davis was not only my House colleague, she was my Virginia colleague who represented the First District of Virginia--a district, which she proudly called ``America's 1st District'' because of our country's roots at Jamestown and the many significant events in history, which occurred there. Her career in elected office spanned 10 short years--from her first election in 1997 to the Virginia House of Delegates to her four elected terms in the House beginning in 2000. But over that decade, she made her mark as a deeply caring and hard-working public servant who believed in commonsense, conservative ideals. She was a person of honesty, integrity, and strong moral conviction in representing her district and living her life. She was a dedicated and tenacious fighter for her beliefs, and the importance of her faith was obvious in the way she cared for and treated others. And, above all else, she worked tirelessly to protect the interests of the men and women in uniform, their families, and veterans. Mr. Speaker, I believe that this designation will serve as a constant reminder to the constituents of the First District of Jo Ann's service and leadership. I wholeheartedly urge my colleagues to join us in recognizing Jo Ann's memory by supporting this bill.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, last week the annual Medicare trustees report concluded that consideration of reforms to ensure the financial security of Medicare must occur in the near future. The report states, ``The sooner the solutions are enacted, the more flexible and gradual they can be.'' As lawmakers, we are obligated, on economic and moral grounds, to tackle this enormous issue. Newspaper headlines in the days following the release of the report say as follows, ``Should political stalemate end, entitlement solution possible''; ``Entitlement reform cannot wait on politics''; ``Budget experts left and right urge action on entitlements.'' Every day that the Congress doesn't act, nor the administration, we miss an opportunity for our children and our grandchildren to get this country moving. Congressman Cooper and I have a bill called the SAFE Commission. It's a bipartisan bill. I am also, Mr. Speaker, disappointed that Secretary Paulson has failed to address this issue. He said he feels like he is playing solitaire. Secretary Paulson, there are 74 cosponsors in the House, 40 Republicans, 34 Democrats that are waiting for you to do something. Secretary Paulson, if you leave this administration with failing to do that, you will regret it.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, last Tuesday the annual Social Security Medicare Trustees Report was issued, and not surprisingly, drawing the same dismal conclusions it did last year. We have all heard the statistics about the demographic challenge retirement of the Baby Boomers generation presents. But what are we doing about it? I am disappointed that this Congress and this administration continue to turn a blind eye toward the country's unsustainable financial path. The American people cannot afford to have this issue languish in partisan gridlock. Americans should know the longer we wait to get our fiscal house in order, the harder and more abrupt the changes will be for America's younger generation. I am challenging all of us to be part of the solution so we can tell our children and our grandchildren that while serving in Congress, we did everything in our power to protect their futures. Please cosponsor the Cooper-Wolf SAFE Commission Act, which will put everything, entitlement spending, tax policy, and all other Federal programs on the table, and require action on controlling the long-term spending.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed in the administration and especially Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson for not embracing solutions to the economic tsunami that is off our coast. Congressman Cooper and I have proposed the SAFE Commission to respond to what the outgoing U.S. Comptroller, David Walker, characterizes as a ``tsunami of spending and debt levels that could swamp our ship of state.'' We have $53 trillion in unfunded liabilities and are over $9 trillion in debt. What more does Secretary Paulson need? The SAFE Commission Act has 74 bipartisan cosponsors. It has been endorsed by the Business Roundtable, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, and think tanks across the political spectrum. If we don't get our financial house in order and begin controlling entitlement spending, it will be our children and grandchildren who pay the price. How will Secretary Paulson feel if he leaves at the end of this term and has done nothing, has done nothing to deal with the entitlement issue? Secretary Paulson, we ask you to support the Cooper-Wolf bipartisan commission.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise today to call the attention of the House to the 20th anniversary of Saddam Hussein's attack on the city of Halabja with chemical and biological weapons. On March 16, 1988, these weapons killed some 5,000 Kurdish men, women and children, as part of Hussein's Al-Anfal campaign to kill and displace the Kurdish population in northern Iraq. According to a comprehensive study by Human Rights Watch, the 1988 Al-Anfal campaign consisted of approximately 40 gas attacks and resulted in the deaths of at least 50,000 and perhaps as many as 100,000 Iraqi Kurds. The worst in this series of attacks was on Halabja. The attack in 1988 has left behind a cruel and persistent legacy on the village of Halabja, where inhabitants experience a high instance of life threatening medical conditions due to the persistence of noxious poisons in the food and water supply. I ask that our colleagues remember this day, which exemplifies the legacy of brutality and human rights abuses that characterized the regime of the late Saddam Hussein.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I am deeply disappointed that the FY 2009 budget resolution we are considering today continues business as usual in the House. This resolution is another missed opportunity to come to grips with the financial crisis looming on the horizon for our Nation. We face enormous fiscal challenges and addressing them will take bipartisan commitment. The budget resolution--and all of the substitutes--fail to address the long-term spending crisis staring us right in the face. Jim Cooper and I have been working together with almost 70 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle ii offering a solution--the Cooper-Wolf SAFE Commission Act--to respond to what outgoing U.S. Comptroller David Walker characterizes as a ``tsunami of spending and debt levels that could swamp our ship of state.'' At the Government Accountability Office, Mr. Walker has coordinated the country-wide ``Fiscal Wake Up Tour'' and has done a tremendous job of working to educate the American people on the grave condition of our country's fiscal health. I salute David Walker for the yeoman work he has done in bringing this issue to the front burner. He is leaving GAO this week, but he is not abandoning the cause in which he believes and into which he has poured his heart and soul over the past few years. He was quoted as saying, ``I love my job. I love GAO. But I love my country more.'' Republicans and Democrats must take to heart David Walker's words-- for the love of country--and come together to avert the financial tsunami coming closer and closer to our Nation's shores. It doesn't take an expert to understand that this nation is teetering on the edge of a financial crisis like no other time in our history. We had the opportunity in this year's budget process to take the initial steps to get our financial house in order. But again this budget cycle, the House is choosing to look the other way and continue business as usual. If we don't get our country's financial house in order and make the sacrifices necessary today, the future for our children and grandchildren will be bleak. Our economic growth will come to a grinding halt, our standard of living and even our national security will be at risk if we don't start actively working to change our current course. We cannot continue to keep borrowing and mortgaging our future to countries like China and Saudi Arabia that carry obscene amounts of our debt. This issue is an economic and moral issue that hangs like an ominous cloud over everything we do as public servants, yet many ignore it. I understand we won't be able to fix our financial woes overnight, but we must come together across the aisle if there is ever to be any hope of ensuring that our Nation's future is strong. That's why Representative Jim Cooper and I joined efforts and have been calling for a national bipartisan commission that will put everything--entitlement spending, other Federal program spending and tax policy--on the table and come up with recommendations to halt the mounting debt. Nothing would be off limits for discussion by the commission members. A critical component of the commission's work will be to engage the American people in a national dialogue about the scope of the country's financial conditions and solutions to the problem. After spending 6 months conducting townhall-style meetings around the country, the commission will present a report to Congress describing the long-term fiscal problems, public suggestions and views, and policy options available to get us back on the right track. Modeled after the Federal base-closing process, Congress would be required to vote up or down on the plan in its entirety. Mandating congressional action is what makes the SAFE Commission unique. If other viable bipartisan solutions are presented, I think we should look at those, too. The Cooper-Wolf SAFE Commission legislation has been endorsed by groups across a wide political spectrum--groups who usually disagree more than they agree on policy issues--the Brookings Institution, the Heritage Foundation, the Concord Coalition, and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The Business Roundtable and National Federation of Independent Business are also on board. National columnists David Brooks, David Broder, and Robert Samuelson all have written about the entitlement crisis facing our country and the SAFE Commission as a potential way forward. Senators Conrad and Gregg have introduced similar legislation in the Senate. The financial tsunami is moving closer to our shores and the longer we wait to act, the harder it will be to stop the tidal wave of red ink. If our children and grandchildren were on the beach with an actual tsunami off the coast, we would do everything we could to help them. We must move beyond politics and come to grips with the fact that the financial future of our country is an American issue and it's on our watch to fix. How can this Congress sit by knowing full well that our financial woes will haunt generations to come? I could easily use all the time for general debate today providing the evidence to support the critical need to address the nation's financial future. This should be the number one budget priority for this Congress. Let me give an example. In January, Moody's Investors Service released its annual report which concluded that the United States triple-A bond rating is at risk. The United States could lose its triple-A bond rating as early as 2012. What does that mean? That means that respected credit-rating agencies are projecting that the United States will be on par with Greece and Estonia by 2015, Poland and Mexico by 2020, and below investment grade--junk debt--by 2025. Here's more evidence: the retirement of the baby boomers started this year and presents a demographic challenge that is unprecedented. In 2006, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security consumed 40 percent of the budget. That percentage is expected to jump to 51 percent in less than 10 years. It may be out of sight, out of mind for now, but it's simple math. As the number of Americans aged 65 and up rises, and the working population shrinks, more Americans will draw on promised benefits. The rubber will meet the road, and we will have done nothing to cushion the blow. We cannot continue to avoid our responsibility to future generations of Americans by passing on a broken system in the form of unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligations and unsustainable spending. Simply put, the budget resolution set forth this year represents a missed opportunity. We need to follow the example of David Walker and for the love of our country, and for our children and grandchildren, do what it will take to protect our Nation's future. The SAFE Commission is the bipartisan way forward. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert for the Record a letter I received from U.S. Comptroller General David Walker, a recent Financial Times article about our Nation's triple-A bond rating, and a Robert Samuelson op-ed from The Washington Post. [From the Washington Post, October 3, 2007] Escaping the Budget Impasse (By Robert J. Samuelson) Almost everyone knows that the next president will have to wrestle with the immense costs of retiring baby boomers. Comes now a small band of Democrats and Republicans who want to do the new president a giant favor. They want to force the new administration to face the problem in early 2009. Why is this a favor? Because dealing with this issue is so politically unsavory that resolving it quickly would be a godsend. Otherwise, it could haunt the White House for four years. Let's review the problem (again). From 2000 to 2030, the 65-and-over population will roughly double, from 35 million to 72 million, or from about 12 percent of the population to nearly 20 percent. Spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid--three big programs that serve the elderly--already represents more than 40 percent of the federal budget. In 2006, these three programs cost $1.1 trillion, more than twice defense spending. Left on automatic pilot, these programs are plausibly projected to grow to about 75 percent of the present budget by 2030. Stalemate results because all the ways of dealing with these pressures are controversial. There are only four: (a) massive tax increases--on the order of 30 to 50 percent by 2030; (b) draconian cuts in other government programs (note that the projected increases in Social Security and Medicare, as a share of national income, are more than all of today's domestic discretionary programs); (c) cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid--higher eligibility ages or lower benefits for wealthier retirees; or (d) undesirably large budget deficits. The proposed escape seems at first so drearily familiar and demonstrably ineffective that it's hardly worth discussing: a bipartisan commission. But what would distinguish this commission from its many predecessors is that Congress would have to vote on its recommendations. The political theory is that, presented with a bipartisan package that cannot be amended, most politicians would do what they believe (privately) ought to be done rather than allow pressure groups, including retirees, to paralyze the process. There is precedent for this approach. Since 1988, Congress has allowed more than 600 military bases and facilities to be closed or streamlined using a similar arrangement. An independent Base Realignment and Closure Commission evaluates the Pentagon's proposed closings and listens to objections. With the president's approval, it then submits its own list, which goes into effect unless vetoed by both houses of Congress. This process provides members of Congress bipartisan ``cover'' and prevents amendments from weakening the package. Two prominent proposals would adapt this approach to the budget. The first, offered by Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), the chairman and ranking minority member of the Budget Committee, would create a 16-member commission, evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. All eight Democrats would be from Congress, as would six Republicans. The administration would have two members, including the secretary of the Treasury. Conrad's notion is that the impasse is political and that only practicing politicians--people with ``skin in the game''--can craft a compromise that can be sold to their peers. The commission would report in December 2008. Twelve of its 16 members would have to support the plan, with congressional passage needing 60 percent approval (60 senators, 261 representatives). These requirements, Conrad and Gregg argue, would ensure bipartisan support. The other proposal comes from Reps. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.) and Frank Wolf (R-VA.) It would also create a 16-member commission, with two major differences. First, only four of its members would be from Congress. Second, though Congress would have to vote on the commission's proposal, there would be some leeway for others--including the president--to present alternatives as long as they had the same long-term budget impact. Any proposal, however, would have to be voted on as a package without amendments. A combination of these plans might work best. A 20-member group would be manageable and should include four outsiders to provide different perspectives and, possibly, to build public support. Perhaps the head of AARP should be included. And it would be a mistake to present the next president with a take-it-or-leave-it package. The Cooper-Wolf plan would allow a new administration to make changes--and get credit-- without being able to start from scratch. This commission approach has potential pitfalls: It might create a face-saving package that does little. But everything else has failed. The main political beneficiary would be the next president. It would be revealing if some of the hopefuls--Democrats and Republicans--would show that they grasp this by providing their endorsements. Otherwise, the odds that Congress will even create the commission are slim.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, in January, Moody's Investors Service released its annual report which concluded that the United States triple-A bond rating is at risk. We should care that respectable credit rating agencies are projecting that the United States will be on par with Estonia by the year 2015, Poland and Mexico by 2020, and below investment grade, junk debt, by 2025. Our Nation cannot continue on its current financial path. The Cooper- Wolf SAFE Commission Act would put everything on the table, tax policy, entitlements, and other Federal programs, to provide a bipartisan way forward on this issue. Over 70 Members from both sides of the aisle, Republican and Democrat, are already cosponsoring the bill. We must work together to rein in spending. We cannot continue to avoid a responsibility to future generations, to our children and our grandchildren, by passing on a broken system in the form of unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligations and unsustainable spending. [From the Financial Times, Jan. 11, 2008] U.S.'s Triple-A Credit Rating `Under Threat' (By Francesco Guerrera, Aline van Duyn and Daniel Pimlott) The U.S. is at risk of losing its top-notch triple-A credit rating within a decade unless it takes radical action to curb soaring healthcare and social security spending, Moody's, the credit rating agency, said yesterday. The warning over the future of the triple-A rating--granted to U.S. Government debt since it was first assessed in 1917-- reflects growing concerns over the country's ability to retain its financial and economic supremacy. It could also put further pressure on candidates from both the Republican and Democratic parties to sharpen their focus on healthcare and pensions in the run-up to November's presidential election. Most analysts expect future administrations to deal with the costs of healthcare and social security and there is no reflection of any long-term concern about the U.S.'s financial health in the value of its debt. But Moody's warning comes at a time when U.S. confidence in its economic prowess has been challenged by the rising threat of a recession, a weak dollar and the credit crunch. In its annual report on the U.S., Moody's signalled increased concern that rapid rises in Medicare and Medicaid-- the government-funded healthcare programmes for the old and the poor--would ``cause major fiscal pressures'' in years to come. Unlike Moody's previous assessment of US government debt in 2005, yesterday's report specifically links rises in healthcare and social security spending to the credit rating. ``The combination of the medical programmes and social security is the most important threat to the triple-A rating over the long term,'' it said. Steven Hess, Moody's lead analyst for the U.S., told the Financial Times that in order to protect the country's top rating, future administrations would have to rein in healthcare and social security costs. ``If no policy changes are made, in 10 years from now we would have to look very seriously at whether the U.S. is still a triple-A credit,'' he said. Mr. Hess said any downgrade in the U.S. rating would have serious consequences for the global economy. ``The U.S. rating is the anchor of the world's financial system. If you have a downgrade, you have a problem,'' he said. Moody's did once threaten to cut the rating of some of the U.S. Treasury's debt when Congress refused to pass the president's budget in the mid-1990s. Other large economies, notably Japan in the 1990s, have had to suffer the symbolic blow of losing their top-notch credit rating. Last year, David Walker, comptroller general of the U.S., caused controversy when he compared America's current situation with the dying days of the Roman empire and warned the country was on ``a burning platform'' of unsustainable policies. Medicare and Medicaid spending, which has risen sharply over the past few decades and now accounts for about 45 per cent of total federal spending, up from about 25 per cent in 1975, has long been a source of concern. Last month, Peter Orszag, director of the Congressional Budget Office, which advises Congress on the federal budget, said the issue was ``the central fiscal challenge'' facing the US. Most presidential candidates have vowed to reform the healthcare system but many of them, especially on the Democratic side, have focused on extending coverage to the 40m-plus uninsured Americans rather than on cutting costs.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I testified last week before the Budget Committee about the enormous fiscal challenge we face as a Nation and offered a bipartisan solution to respond to outgoing U.S. Comptroller David Walker's characterization of a ``tsunami of spending and debt levels that could swamp'' our Nation. We must come together across the aisle, and if we don't get our financial house in order and make the sacrifices necessary today, we will hurt our children and our grandchildren. Jim Cooper and I have joined efforts, a Democrat and a Republican, calling for a national bipartisan commission that will put everything on the table, entitlement spending, other Federal program spending, and tax policy, and come up with recommendations to put our country on a sustainable path. Nothing would be off limits for discussion and recommendations by the commission members. Congress would be required to vote up or down on the plan. If other viable bipartisan solutions are presented, we should look at those too. I urge Members, I beg Members on both sides of the aisle to come together to take this issue to heart. Let's work together to take the necessary actions to save this country.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman. And in closing, unless the gentleman has any other comments, I would say this needs to be bipartisan. It is H. Con. Res. 263. I believe it will pass the House. I think it is inevitable that it will pass the House. We have to come together. I acknowledge there have been some sincere efforts made, and I think we come together and institutionalize this with regard to this select committee. So I want to thank both Mr. Wamp and Mr. Kirk, and Mr. Kingston who could not be here, and the other Members who have put this together and say it needs to be done bipartisan. We have to do it so the American people can say, ``Well done. It really makes sense.'' I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, the need for earmark reform should be an issue that we can all agree upon, a bipartisan agreement. As reported last week, Congress' approval rating fell to just 22 percent. Will the House sit idly by patting each other on the back as this issue continues to grow and be one that the American people care deeply about? Quite frankly, the effort in the House to bring a level of transparency in the earmark process, as good as it may appear, has yet to satisfy the American people. As a first step to restoring confidence in the earmark system, Congressman Jack Kingston, a member of the Appropriations Committee, Zack Wamp, a member of the committee, and myself have introduced H. Con. Res. 263, which calls for a joint select committee to review the earmark process, and it places a moratorium on all earmarks while the panel undertakes its work. Congress holds the power of the purse, and, quite frankly, I don't believe the American people really want us to cede that authority to the executive branch. Under the Constitution, that is the job of the congressional branch. And while I believe that the majority of earmarks are for purposes which help people, those Members who oppose earmarks have made some legitimate claims, and they have to be addressed. There have been positive earmarks to fight gangs, to fight the violent MS 13 gangs. We created an office of gang intelligence in the FBI to track the gang movement across the country, and there is a growing problem with regard to gangs. The Iraq Study Group was an earmark, and that helped bring about fresh eyes on the target, if you will, bringing former Secretary of State Jim Baker and former cochairman of the 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, along with Ed Meese, former Attorney General of the Reagan administration whose son is on the staff with General Petraeus over in Iraq, and people like Chuck Robb who is a former marine and Governor and Senator who fought in Vietnam. So it brought together a group of people to take a look at that, and 61 of the 70-some recommendations of the Iraq Study Group have been adopted now, and that basically was an earmark. I also was told that the work that Dr. Francis Collins has done, and I may be wrong on this, but Dr. Collins has received the gold medal. He is the one who has mapped the human genome system. And there are people alive today because of the work that Dr. Collins has done. Dr. Collins will map those genes whereby we know that some individual with a certain gene may get a certain condition and now they can deal with that to save their life. So there have been some very positive ones. But I think it is important to acknowledge that the Members who have opposed earmarks have made some legitimate claims, and they deserve that we look at those claims and address those claims. The joint select committee on earmark reform, which is called for in the bill, would be comprised of 16 members, Mr. Speaker, evenly split between the House and the Senate, because whatever we do, the House and the Senate have to be together, also, between Republicans and Democrats. And I think the American people are thirsty. They are thirsty for some bipartisan activity out of this Congress. So we will come together, Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate, to form this committee. The panel would examine the way the earmarks are included in authorizing bills, which has not been done, appropriation bills. And to the credit of the committee, there has been some work done on the appropriations. Also, tax and tariff measures. Also, what has not been done very well, executive branch earmarks would also be studied. I want to stress that again, because I think the Congress has ignored some of this and I think the general public doesn't understand, but this panel would also, Mr. Speaker, look at executive branch earmarks, reviewing earmarks in all bills considered by Congress. All bills is really the key. The House, during this period of time, should place a moratorium on all earmarks until the joint select committee has finished its work and we are able to put into place a rule system that restores the confidence of Americans that legislation is not loaded up with hidden special interests or wasteful spending. It would restore honesty, integrity, and openness to the process that everyone would feel very confident because the ground rules would have been agreed to by everyone. The American public would see how this was done. I strongly support the earmark reform, including listing names of sponsors on earmarks or specific line item spending. But the rules, Mr. Speaker, must apply an equal standard to all legislation, appropriations, as well as authorizing and tax bills and disclosing earmark sponsors. It must be across the board in every bill, but it also must be a process of indisputable integrity and probity that is honest and authentic, and one in which the American people have absolute trust. That is the key. It has to be a process, Mr. Speaker, in which the American people have absolute trust. Earmark reform must be bipartisan. It must be an issue on which both political parties can come together so that every Member of Congress can know what is in there, the American people can know it. And I am hopeful that Members on both sides of the aisle will join this effort and support the Kingston-Wamp-Wolf earmark reform bill. Then, Mr. Speaker, we have the opportunity after we do that, because I know most Americans are concerned about the spending with regard to the Federal debt and the deficit. I have a bill with Congressman Cooper, again, a bipartisan bill, and again, it is good to see, we have to work across the aisle. It is called the Cooper-Wolf bill, Mr. Speaker, and what it does, it sets up a national commission of eight Republicans and eight Democrats, and I would tell Members that there are 70 Members plus on the bill, roughly 30 Democratic Members and 40 Republican Members. I must say, Congressman Hoyer gave a very powerful speech at the Press Club several months ago endorsing this concept. On the bill, we have Congressman Boehner, the minority leader. We have Congressman Blunt, the minority whip. We have people on both sides of the aisle of all political viewpoints from every part of the country. And what it does, Mr. Speaker, it puts everything on the table. It puts Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and tax policy on the table. It has the support of the Heritage Foundation and Brookings. Alice Rivlin, head of the Office of Management and Budget in the Clinton administration, supports it. We have the support of some of the more thoughtful think-tanks, such as Brookings. A lot of different groups. We have had favorable editorials and comments from David Broder from The Washington Post, David Brooks from The New York Times, and Robert Samuelson, who writes a column for The Washington Post. Also we have had editorials in papers like the Tennesseean and the Richmond Times Dispatch and papers like that. What it would basically do, it would have this national commission of eight Republicans and eight Democrats to go around the country having a conversation with the American people. They would listen to the American people. Then they would hold public hearings in every Federal Reserve district in the Nation. So they are required to go everywhere. Interestingly enough, the Brookings Foundation and Heritage, along with David Walker of the Government Accountability Office, are now doing this in what they call ``wake-up tours,'' where they are going out around the Nation to tell the American people of the danger, the fiscal danger, the financial danger, that awaits this Nation if we do nothing about this spending and the debt and the deficit. Congressman Cooper knows so much about this. I wish he was with me here today. But I respect his knowledge and understanding and his work on the Budget Committee. But, Mr. Speaker, David Walker said, and I will insert it in the Congressional Record, I have sent it out to some Members of the House, David Walker said there was a tsunami, a financial tsunami off the coast waiting to come in and overcome and overtake this country. As the father of five children, if our children were on the beach and someone said there was a tsunami off the coast of New Jersey or the North Carolina coast or the Maryland coast, we would as parents want to do everything we can to help our kids. So for our children and for our grandchildren, we have an obligation to deal with this problem. Also, Mr. Speaker, I think it is also a moral issue. In the Ten Commandments it says: ``Thou shall not steal,'' and for one generation to be living off the next generation is in essence stealing. With all the support that we have, the bipartisan support, again, a lot of good Members on both sides of the aisle, I am hopeful that there can be a way that we can bring this bill up and vote on it in this session. So with the earmark bill that I spoke about earlier which deals with a fundamental problem that the Congress has to deal with, and with this bill, we can have a renaissance in this Nation, create jobs and make a tremendous difference. So I just hope that we can pass both of these bills in this Congress. I see my friend from Tennessee, and I will yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp).

Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman. His comments are very good. I think it really needs to be bipartisan and it needs to be institutionalized, and it needs to be done in such a way that the American people have confidence. I would yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), also a member of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Congressman Tom Lantos, our beloved friend and colleague, who passed away on Monday morning from esophagus cancer. Believers in human rights and oppressed peoples around the world have suffered a terrible blow with the loss of Tom Lantos. He was a tireless champion for those suffering oppression and violence and discrimination, and the world is quite simply a more painful place with his passing. Every time a human rights issue came up on the House floor, Tom was always there, speaking out for the voiceless. Tom's experiences escaping Nazi concentration camps twice as a teenager and losing most of his immediate family in the carnage of the Holocaust cultivated in him a unique sensitivity to suffering. His compassion and willingness to stand up for what is right was a constant inspiration to me, both in our work in the House of Representatives and in our co-chairmanship of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus. He was a hero in the eyes of so many, and his loss will be felt acutely by all of us. I extend my most sincere condolences to Tom's family, and I encourage my colleagues to take up the torch with which Tom illuminated the world's darkest corners.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, by defeating the previous question on the rule, Members will allow consideration of H. Con. Res. 263, earmark reform legislation introduced by Jack Kingston, Zach Wamp, and myself. Quite frankly, our effort in the House to bring a level of transparency in the earmark process has yet to satisfy the American public. Congress holds the power of the purse and I don't believe the American public really wants us to cede that authority to the executive branch. And while I believe that the majority of earmarks are for purposes which help people, those Members who oppose earmarks have made some legitimate claims. H. Con. Res. 263 would help restore confidence in Congress by creating a Joint Select Committee on earmarks and place a moratorium on all earmarks while the panel undertakes its work. The Joint Select Committee (JSC) on Earmark Reform would be comprised of 16 members, evenly split between the House and Senate and Republicans and Democrats. The panel would examine the way earmarks are included in authorizing, appropriations and tax and tariff measures. Executive branch earmarks would also be studied. Reviewing earmarks in all bills considered by Congress is key. The House should place a moratorium on all earmarks until the Joint Select Committee has finished its work and we are able to put into place a rules system that restores the confidence of Americans that legislation is not loaded up with hidden special interest, wasteful spending. I strongly support earmark reform including listing names of sponsors of earmarks or specific line-item spending. But the rules must apply an equal standard in all legislation, appropriations as well as authorizing and tax bills, in disclosing earmark sponsors. It must be across-the-board in every bill, but it also must be a process of indisputable integrity and probity that is honest and authentic and in which the American people have absolute trust. Earmark reform should be a bipartisan issue that every member of Congress is concerned about.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues Representative Christopher H. Smith of New Jersey and Representative Joseph R. Pitts, we rise today to honor the memory of Pastor Peter Dugulescu, who was the founder and president of the charitable organization ``Jesus the Hope of Romania'' and who passed away from a heart attack on January 3, 2008. Pastor Dugulescu was born in 1945 in Romania, eventually marrying and having four children. He served as a Baptist pastor during the Communist regime, and was seen as a fighter of the revolution and a true spiritual leader in Romania. He was given the honor of many awards, including the ``Ambassador of Peace'' award from the Interreligious and International Peace Council. Pastor Dugulescu was a dear friend of many of us who have followed events in Romania over the years. He was a strong Christian, and a selfless servant of the poor. His charity opened an orphanage, created feeding programs for the impoverished, and established a home for the elderly and handicapped children. The loss of this bright soul will be felt acutely by all whose lives he touched. We extend our condolences to his family and friends.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise today to bring the attention of the House to the retirement of Rose B. Kaplan, area director for 16 Social Security Administration offices in the Washington area. I want to take this opportunity to thank Ms. Kaplan for her dedication to a lifetime of public service. She has served many congressional offices and constituents in the Nation's capital region, including Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia and West Virginia, over her 40-year career with Social Security. Rose has had a distinguished career with the agency. She began as a GS-2 typing clerk and progressed up the ranks of responsibility, eventually gaining her current position as area director. She has been honored several times for great leadership and commitment to the Agency's mission, most recently receiving the Commissioner's Team Award for compassion and leadership in the Severely Injured Marines and Sailors, SIMS, project involving expediting support and processing of military casualty claims. Ms. Kaplan was also integral to shaping and implementing the region's diversity strategy, formulating training and culture programs. Ms. Kaplan has resided in the Washington area for most of her life and currently lives in Montgomery County, MD, with her husband, Phil. She plans to travel and spend more time with her family upon retirement. I am pleased to call attention to her accomplishments and ask that my colleagues in the House join me in recognizing her outstanding service.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend the important work of U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan Andrew Natsios in light of the announcement that he is resigning. Special Envoy Natsios has led efforts to achieve comprehensive peace in Sudan, which has suffered decades of war and poverty. I have visited Sudan five times, most recently in July 2004 when I led the first congressional delegation with Senator Sam Brownback to Darfur. I witnessed the nightmare with my own eyes. Every day that passes, more men are killed, more women are raped, and more children die of malnutrition. Special Envoy Natsios has worked tirelessly to end this nightmare, traveling frequently to Sudan to bring greater pressure to bear on the Sudanese Government, and traveling all over the world to coalesce international support for a peaceful end to the violence in Darfur. Mr. Natsios has also worked to maintain the focus of both the United States and the international community on the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between north and south Sudan. Without a comprehensive understanding of and approach to Sudan's many conflicts, any policy responses will be inherently flawed. Mr. Natsios's understanding of this reality has filtered through his approach to Sudan. During his time as special envoy to Sudan, Mr. Natsios has demonstrated an unflagging desire to alleviate the suffering of the men, women and children all across Sudan who want to be free from oppression and violence, and who want a voice in their livelihoods and in the future of their country. I wish Mr. Natsios the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my deep appreciation for Cherith Norman's service to our country as senior congressional adviser in the Bureau of Legislative Affairs at the U.S. Department of State. I have had the privilege of getting to know Cherith during her time as senior congressional adviser in the State Department's Bureau of Legislative Affairs on budget and appropriations issues. She is one of the best congressional liaisons from the State Department that I have worked with during my entire time in office. I have been deeply impressed by her work ethic and commitment to serving the United States government. She is conscientious, dedicated, and quick-thinking, and has been a tremendous asset to both me and my staff. Cherith worked for Senator Jim DeMint for 6 years while he was a U.S. Representative and also during his congressional campaign. She worked at the State Department for 4 years, serving as a political appointee since 2003 in the Bureau of Legislative Affairs. During her time at the State Department, Cherith has served as interlocutor between the appropriators and the department on critical spending issues; planned countless congressional member and staff trips overseas; coordinated with the White House, National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget and other Executive Branch agencies to present the President's international affairs budget to Congress each year; advised senior State Department officials on policy and funding strategy for international programs and State Department operations, and, in a courteous, conscientious and efficient manner, facilitated clear communication between Congress and the State Department. Cherith is moving to New York to serve on the staff of Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad in the U.S. mission to the United Nations. Cherith's strong work ethic and selfless attitude have been the hallmarks of her service to our government and to the department, and I believe that she will serve the State Department very well in this new capacity. I know I am joined by many of my colleagues in the House of Representatives in expressing our appreciation for her work here in Washington, our sadness at her departure, and our best wishes for her future endeavors in our mission to the United Nations.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. I want to begin by thanking the chairman and the ranking member for bringing the bill up, and also to Congresswoman Barbara Lee for the effort here. And hopefully this bill will be signed certainly before Christmas. I think as we talk about the bill today, we should remember that genocide did take place, and in a certain respect continues to take place as we now stand here at this time. Also, keep in mind, when talking about the Sudan Government, Osama bin Laden lived in Sudan from 1991 to 1996. And the same government that is there now invited Osama bin Laden to live there. And Carlos DeJackal and many other evil people have been in that country for a long period of time. This bill, the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act, takes a very important step to pressure the Sudanese Government to halt the violent genocide, which continues in many respects. It authorizes State and local governments to divest assets in companies that conduct business in Sudan. It also prohibits the U.S. Government from contracting with companies which conduct business in Sudan. And there are many companies that are doing business. There are many foreign companies, some American companies, a lot of Chinese companies. So this is not set up to do something for something that may happen. There are companies today that are doing business and prospering there. Many have asked how to be involved in stopping the genocide. One answer is to pass this bill. Targeted disinvestment is a powerful tool. It is important to understand that targeted disinvestment is the removal of investment money from companies that are directly or indirectly helping the Sudanese Government perpetuate genocide. There are Chinese companies that are actually helping; some have sold weapons, some have sold Hind helicopters, some have sold other equipment that is helping with regard to this. Since the ultimate intent of Sudan disinvestment is to protect the victims of genocide, it is important to tailor the disinvestment to have the maximum impact on the Government of Sudan's behavior and minimal harm to innocent Sudanese. Such targeted disinvestment excludes companies involved in agriculture, production and distribution of consumer goods or activities intended to relieve human suffering. Many States, and they should be applauded, including California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey, and Oregon, have already moved to divest from companies doing business in Sudan. More States should act. In closing, I want to again thank the Disinvestment Task Force. I would hope there would be a rollcall on this as a message so everyone knows. And again, I want to thank Congresswoman Barbara Lee for her persistence and effort to bring this up and pass this. Keep in mind, as you're voting today, and hopefully there will be, with the chairman, look up there. This will really send a message to the Sudan Government. And there is genocide taking place today as we now vote.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Virginia, the Honorable Robert J. ``Rob'' Wittman, be permitted to take the oath of office today. His certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest and no question has been raised with regard to his election.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the entire Virginia congressional delegation, it is a great privilege to introduce the newest Member of the 110th Congress, the gentleman from the First Congressional District, Rob Wittman. Rob Wittman has been a public servant for more than 20 years, serving as a town councilman, mayor, county supervisor and board chairman, and member of the Virginia House of Delegates. Rob holds a doctorate degree in public policy and administration, a master of public health degree in health policy and administration, and a bachelor of science degree in biology. Throughout his career, Rob's wife, Kathryn, a public school teacher, has been at his side. They are the parents of two children, daughter, Devon, and son, Josh. Madam Speaker, Rob Wittman is ready to get to work following the decades-long tradition of former Congressman and Senator Paul Trible, of former Congressman Herb Bateman, and our beloved Member, who just left us to go home to be with the Lord, Jo Ann Davis, in providing outstanding and dedicated representation in Congress for the people of Virginia's First District. I present to you the distinguished gentleman from the Commonwealth of Virginia, Rob Wittman.