Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. ``One interrogator kept banging my head against the wall. ``After 2 days, he tied my hands behind my back and started beating me with an electric wire. The interrogation and beating lasted for 3 to 4 hours into the night. ``For the next 2 days, I was tied up from both wrists to the bars of an iron door. From morning until lunchtime they put a hood on my head and hung me by my wrists.'' Mr. Speaker, these are the direct quotes from detainees apprehended in Afghanistan and subjected to torture at the hands of Afghan intelligence officials and police forces. It's all documented in a report issued by the United Nations this week. What they found was systematic abuse that followed a pattern--not random or isolated incidents--a pattern at several different facilities, involving at least 300 prisoners. There's more. Kicks to the head; beatings with electric cables, rubber hoses, and wooden sticks; electric shocks to the thumbs; threats of sexual abuse, some of them against children. And there are some even more graphic, gruesome details that I know we've read about that I'll spare my colleagues for now. No Americans have been directly implicated in this. But as long as we're continuing a military occupation of Afghanistan and as long as we've taken on the task of training Afghan security forces, I don't see how we avoid the responsibility for these shameful acts of abuse and ritual humiliation. At the very, very least, Mr. Speaker, we're guilty of shoddy oversight and failure to instruct Afghan officials in humane interrogation techniques. Of course, this kind of brutality is a gross violation of international human rights standards. But it's also well-documented that torture doesn't work. Torture, at the very most for a normal human being, will force that human being to confess to anything under such duress, and it's a complete failure as an intelligence-gathering strategy. The war in Afghanistan has been going on for 10 years now. It's costing American taxpayers $10 billion a month. How can we justify spending all this money, money that we need to invest in job creation right here at home, on a policy and a mission that is leading to such barbaric acts. How can we continue to sacrifice blood and treasure on this war, a war that is being waged in such gross violation of our very American values? I have never been more convinced it's time to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, when you ask Americans what Congress' focus should be, guess what they don't say? They don't say, Forget about jobs. What this country really needs is a divisive assault on women's privacy and primary care. This bill tells women, Madam Speaker, that if they use their own money, using their own money they can't purchase insurance that includes abortion coverage. Isn't it the majority party that is constantly saying that they trust people with their own money? I guess that applies if you're a CEO but not if you're a woman making a wrenching decision about your reproductive health. This bill has no chance of becoming law. It is a dog-and-pony show designed to please the far-right fringe. I say: Do it on your own time, Republicans, and not on the American people's time. I ask us to vote ``no'' now and get to the job at hand, which is to put America back to work.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Marin County's departing Director of Pubic Works, Farhad Mansourian. After more than three decades of service to the County of Marin and seven years as Director of the Department of Public Works, Mr. Mansourian has demonstrated an unparalleled commitment to the people of Marin. His passion for managing public works initiatives has earned him the respect and admiration of colleagues across the North Bay. Mansourian moves on to a position as General Manager of the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) District, where his voice of experience will be instrumental in bringing our regional rail service to completion. Farhad Mansourian began his service with the County of Marin in 1980 as a Junior Civil Engineer, gradually branching into new fields as he was promoted to administrative analyst, traffic operations engineer, road maintenance engineer, and eventually Assistant Director. In 2002, the Marin County Board of Supervisors named Mansourian Director of the Department of Public Works, putting him in charge of an agency with over 200 employees and an annual budget of roughly $80 million. Since that time, Mansourian has distinguished himself as the principal guardian of the County's infrastructure, including roads and bridges, flood control operations, hazardous waste systems, and public buildings. The County has turned to Mansourian every winter to keep an aging infrastructure functioning in the aftermath of heavy storms. The community turned to him in the event of emergencies like flooding or earthquakes many times. Mansourian also serves as Co-Commander of the Regional Urban Search and Rescue Task Force, which has provided assistance not only in the North Bay, but in other communities recovering from natural disasters, as far away as the Gulf Coast. In countless ways, Farhad Mansourian has been responsible for keeping our County functioning by facilitating environmental protection and economic development that ensure the safety of Marin County residents. I have found him to be a thoughtful, reliable, and expert partner when working together on these important issues. Over the past several years, Mansourian has also been a strong advocate for the SMART initiative linking the urban centers of the North Bay with a modem and environmentally responsible rail system. He was active in gathering support for the proposal and in achieving the overwhelming public support received for the bi-county ballot measure providing SMART funding. Mansourian's new role managing the SMART District is fitting for a man so committed to advancing the North Bay's vision for its future, while bridging its infrastructure needs with strong environmental priorities. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to join me in thanking Farhad Mansourian for his many contributions to Marin County. He represents an admirable model of public service, and we wish him the same success in his new endeavors.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I would like to insert into the Record a letter from the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades and a letter from the National Farmers Union in opposition to the Korea FTA. International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO, Hanover, MD, June 30, 2011. Dear Representative: On behalf of the 140,000 active and retired members of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (IUPAT), I am writing you regarding the proposed Free Trade Agreement between the United States and the Republic of Korea (KORUS FTA). I have serious concerns about duty free construction materials entering the United States and the devastating effect that this and all free trade agreements have on the manufacturing sector. The IUPAT represents men and women working in the finishing trades as commercial and industrial painters, drywall finishers, wall coverers, glaziers, glass workers, floor covering installers, sign makers, display workers, convention and show decorators, and many more occupations. Our union is made up of over 400 local union halls throughout the United States. While the IUPAT is working overtime to make sure our membership has the ability to provide for their families through this time of chronic and crippling unemployment, I find it unimaginable that this job killing trade agreement would even be considered. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 13,700,000 Americans remain unemployed and nearly 2.5 million Americans have given up on finding work because job loss is so rampant in their communities. The United State International Trade Commission (ITC) report from March 2010 projects that implementation of the Korea Free Trade Agreement would increase the U.S. goods trade deficit. This predicted increase in the U.S. trade deficit under the Korean FTA would risk the jobs of millions of Americans, including IUPAT members, employed in our industries. Even the White House has ceded the point that this Free Trade Agreement will cost jobs when they demanded on May 16, 2011, that Trade Adjustment Assistance be a prerequisite to the ratification of any of the three pending Free Trade Agreements. While the IUPAT is supportive of the president's promise to provide burial insurance to thousands upon thousands of Americans who will lose their jobs due to the Korean Free Trade Agreement. A better policy would be to focus on rebuilding the frail U.S. economy by investing in American workers instead of workers from North Korea, Korea, China or any other country that imports component parts through Korean ports. Approximately 20% of IUPAT members work in the manufacturing sector. They work to maintain factories and manufacture paint, plate glass, and floor covering materials, and fabricating glass systems. According to the ITC, these members' jobs and their livelihood would be directly threatened by the duty free importation of the products they proudly manufacture or fabricate as American made. IUPAT members working in glass fabrication shops manufacture energy efficient shells for buildings and factories. Their product would be turned away in favor of duty free glass panels shipped from Korea. The ITC report indicates that IUPAT members who manufacture floor covering materials or wall coverings would be told to find a new career when cheap carpets, rugs, and wall covering materials flood the United States duty free. It is clear that duty free will destroy American communities and leave Americans families helpless. Beyond the very troubling job loss predicted by the USITC, I am deeply concerned about the weak rule of origin that was negotiated by President George W. Bush in this Free Trade Agreement. In 2009, millions of pounds of toxic drywall entered the United States. That lack of oversight put thousands of IUPAT members and an estimated 60,000 families at risk. This was the direct result of allowing uninspected products from an under-regulated country. The weak rule of origin opens the United States, the members of the IUPAT, and American property owners up to the strong possibility that subpar and possibly dangerous building materials will enter the United States and be used in our homes and businesses. In the interest of the United States economy and all of the families who wish to be working again, including the membership of the IUPAT, I strongly urge you to stand up for American made products and jobs by voting against the Republic of Korea/United States Free Trade Agreement. Sincerely, James A. Williams, General President.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Carole Dillon-Knutson of Novato, CA, who is retiring after 20 years of public office. She served 16 years on the Novato City Council and four years on the College of Mann Board of Trustees, earning the appreciation of her constituents and peers for her many accomplishments that enhanced the community's quality of life. First elected to the Novato City Council in 1994, Carole is especially proud of significant projects that she worked with colleagues to create including the Novato Arts Center, the Gymnastics Center, several development projects at the former air field at Hamilton from a large wetlands restoration to transitional housing, improvements on Grant Avenue (the city's downtown artery), restoration of City Hall, and refurbishment of the Novato playgrounds. Carole also represented the community on key boards and commissions such as the Association of Bay Area Government's Executive Committee, the North Bay Division of the League of California Cities (President in 2001), the Marin County Council of Mayors and Council members (President in 2004), the Transportation Authority of Marin Executive Committee, and the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit Agency Board. Carole says she feels ``a deep comfort in the priorities and accomplishments that I originally set as my goals: to create a balanced approach and focus on the quality of life issues so important to the residents of Novato.'' Mr. Speaker, I know Carole-Dillon Knutson is looking forward to spending more time with her family, including five grandsons. Please join me in congratulating her on her years of service and in wishing her well in her retirement.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, today with unemployment in the United States at over 9 percent and the middle class under siege, we're considering a Colombian trade bill that would cost, according to the Economic Policy Institute, 55,000 jobs. That makes absolutely no sense. It's bad enough to ship U.S. jobs overseas, but particularly to a country that leads the world in deadly violence against union members. In Colombia, to band together in solidarity with your fellow workers is to take your life into your own hands. Twenty-three trade unionists have been murdered so far this year, including one teacher--a teacher-- who was hanged with barbed wire. Last year, 51 such murders. As the AFL-CIO put it, ``if 51 CEOs had been murdered in Colombia, this deal would be on a very slow track indeed.'' Let's reject these trade agreements, and let's put America back to work with a big, bold jobs plan for the American people.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the Capps amendment, and I move to strike the last word.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, it's been 274 days since the Republicans took over the House. What do we have to show for it? Well, first up, they've introduced a budget that would end Medicare as we know it. Then the Republican-led House voted to take money away from NPR. Next up, they voted to make it easier to outsource jobs. And just last week, they even voted to cut programs supporting green jobs. Quite a record: not one single job-creation bill. So what's on deck for today? A bill that would allow more toxic pollutants in the air that we breathe. I'm certain, Mr. Chairman, that if we went outside and asked 100 people, would you prefer dirtier, more toxic air, we are going to get 100 ``noes.'' So why are we taking this up today? It's not because working families are clamoring for more toxins in their homes, at the workplace, or in the parks. This bill is a handout to the polluters of America. It says that their profits are more important than the health of our Nation. More asthma? Who cares. We've got to make a profit. Well, let's admit what this underlying bill is really about. It's one more break for Big Business at the expense of working families and our communities. The American people have had enough, Mr. Chairman. Let's stand up for public health. Let's stand up for common sense. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous and reckless legislation, and I urge the Republicans to get behind President Obama's jobs bill and put America back to work. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, this week marks an anniversary we must acknowledge, but that we certainly cannot celebrate. This Friday, we will have spent 10 years at war in Afghanistan. We will have spent a decade fighting a war that the American people no longer support. The sobering 10th anniversary is the time for reflection--reflection on how our world has changed in the last 10 years. This war has consumed an unjustifiable amount of our financial treasure, led to an unprecedented burden on our servicemembers, and changed forever how an entire generation of young people views the world. This anniversary is the time to reflect on the choices we've made and their impact on the world. Ten years later, we are still building war machines that have the potential to cause devastating harm to innocent people around the world. Ten years later, many of our Nation's best and brightest are coming home with scars, both physical and mental, that they and their families will live with forevermore. The numbers are against us. After a decade at war, we still have 90,000 soldiers fighting in Afghanistan. More than 1,800 Americans have died. Our Nation has spent $460 billion on an unwinnable war, and tens of thousands of innocent Afghans and Iraqis have been killed. It is well past the time for us to end this. In remembering the last 10 years, we must think of the future. My five grandchildren are now part of a generation that has grown up without knowing what it's like to live in a country at peace. Over the past 10 years, we've led our world down a path towards war rather than fighting for peace, rather than fighting for a smarter security plan. The American people and the global community see the error in our policy, and we are facing increasing scrutiny from our international partners. In fact, not one other government agrees with the U.S.' use of drones. In fact, our European allies have never supported the U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Instead of heeding their calls, we are expanding the use of this deadly force, creating automatic drones that have the potential to cause unchecked devastation. I have spoken from this spot 407 times, as you all know because you've heard me so many times, in support of SMART Security--an approach for an end to the war. And I am not alone. I've been joined by colleagues on both sides of the aisle and have been supported by Americans across the country to call for an end of our war and the return of our troops. That's exactly what my SMART Security plan is about--making military force a last resort and, instead, directing our energy and our resources toward diplomacy, democracy promotion, development aid, and other more powerful, peaceful ways of engaging with the rest of the world. Mr. Speaker, I hope all of my colleagues will take note of Friday's anniversary and realize that now is the time to turn the tide on our policies in Afghanistan. We need to end this war. We need to do it now. We need to promote peace through democracy. We need to promote peace through diplomacy and development. We must bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, there was an article in The Washington Post earlier this week that we should all find very unsettling and disturbing. We know that in recent years the Pentagon has increasingly used unmanned drone aircraft to carry out violent acts of war. And frankly, that's bad enough. But now there's a new and even more frightening technology in the works. It's called ``lethal autonomy.'' And under the system, the drones would no longer be remotely operated and controlled by actual human beings. The lethal autonomy drones would be computer programmed to carry out their deadly mission independently. No human hand providing steering and guidance. I can't even begin to wrap my head around the humanitarian red flags associated with this experiment in robotics. Software can break down. It could even be hacked. Furthermore, computers don't have a conscience. They aren't nimble, they can't make snap decisions based on new information or ethical considerations. They're programmed to do what they do without judgment, discretion, or scruples. You can just imagine, or I can anyway, mass civilian atrocities thanks to a robot drone raging out of control. Thankfully, a group called the International Committee for Robot Arms Control is speaking up and making these points. Pointing out that if we have a treaty banning land mines, why not one that outlaws these automatic killer drones. According to the Post, the military has begun to grapple with the implications of this technology. Well, I can really suggest that they continue grappling before using these technologies and finding the flaws and possible harmful and unpredictable consequences. One advocate of these new drones believes it's possible to program them to comply with international law regarding the conduct of hostilities. Well, I'm certainly skeptical. We couldn't even get the last President of the United States to understand and abide by the Geneva Conventions. I don't know how we're going to get a robot to do it. Madam Speaker, the increasing dehumanization of warfare is part of a terrifying trend. Somehow it's easier to kill one another when we have computers and machines to carry it out for us, when we don't have to stare our own mayhem in the face. As a member of the Science Committee, I'm totally enthusiastic about American high-tech innovation. But I believe we should be using our knowledge and ingenuity to give the civilian economy the boost it needs to create good jobs for hardworking middle class Americans and to create a smarter response to world conflict. All of this money we're funneling to defense contractors to devise evermore sophisticated ways to kill one another must be reinvested in alternatives to warfare and nonviolent ways to resolving conflict. That's what my Smart Security plan does. I've discussed this many, many times from this very spot. It's called Smart Security. It defines military force as the very, very last resort. And it directs energy and resources toward diplomacy, democracy promotion, development, and peaceful ways of engaging with the rest of the world. Madam Speaker, in two weeks' time we will have been at war for a full decade. More than 6,000 Americans have died, 10,000 innocent Afghans and Iraqis have been killed for the cause of their so-called liberation. Many, many more of our own troops have been harmed and will always be living with the results of their injuries. The time is now. The time is to stop building machines that can kill more efficiently and start bringing our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Joseph R. Fink and recognize his contribution to higher education and community involvement in Marin County, California. Dr. Fink is retiring as the President of Dominican University of California. It has been my privilege to work closely with Dr. Fink for many years, during which time his friendship and assistance have been invaluable. Under his leadership Dominican has established itself as a successful university with high ideals and a big vision. Establishing the Green MBA Program and the Center for Sustainability, Dominican University has emerged as an innovative school whose students are working to develop creative solutions to some of the world's toughest problems. Dr. Fink earned a doctorate in American History from Rutgers University and began his career as an Associate Professor of History and Assistant to the President at a small liberal arts college. Before coming to Dominican University, he served as Dean of Arts and Sciences at the City Colleges of Chicago, president of a public college in New Jersey, and president of an independent liberal arts college in Pennsylvania. He is the recipient of many awards and recognitions, including four honorary doctorate degrees for his achievements in higher education and community service. Starting at Dominican University in 1988, during a period of transition, Dr. Fink restructured the management of the university to move it from small college to university status. He worked with the Board of Trustees and the faculty to successfully assume control of academic and fiscal affairs to put the university on a whole new course. With his expertise in management, the university's enrollment almost quadrupled while the average SAT scores rose by more than 180 points. A leader with considerable collaborative skills, he has been innovative in creating opportunities for friends of the university to support its mission. With increased fundraising, the annual operating budget rose dramatically allowing extensive campus renovation, the building of a new recreation complex, new residence halls, and a state- of-the-art science research center. In addition to being a very competent administrator, Dr. Fink is an outstanding member of the community, serving on the boards of a variety of organizations, including the Council of Independent Colleges, the World Affairs Council of Northern California, the Marin Symphony, the American Land Conservancy, and the Commonwealth Club of California. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Fink is a man of remarkable talent and considerable commitment, he will be missed in the community and at the university, but we honor him today and wish him well in his next endeavor. Congratulations, Joseph Fink.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday was a truly historic day in our country's struggle for equal rights for all people. Leaders of the United States Army sent a notice to soldiers serving around the globe that simply said the following: ``Today marks the end of `Don't Ask, Don't Tell.' The law is repealed. From this day forward, gay and lesbian soldiers may serve in our Army with the dignity and respect they deserve. Our rules, regulations, and politics will apply uniformly without regard to sexual orientation, which is a personal and private matter.'' Mr. Speaker, 18 years after this hideous policy was first implemented, it is now gone. And the thousands of soldiers who were shamefully discharged under Don't Ask, Don't Tell may apply for reenlistment. To the men and women whose service and sacrifice have made us so proud, we say, as of yesterday: ``You no longer have to live a lie.'' To them, we say: ``You no longer have to choose between your personhood and your patriotism.'' To them, who have had the courage to do right by America, we now say: ``Your Nation now has the courage to do what is right by you.'' Air Force Lieutenant Josh Seefried, a leader among gay and lesbian servicemembers, describes the oppressive nature of this policy in this way. He said: ``It consumes your thought process, it consumes your future, because of the fear of getting caught.'' Mr. Speaker, it is incomprehensible to me that anyone--in particular, brave, selfless members of our military--should live any day in fear of ``getting caught.'' This step is hugely welcomed, and it is long overdue. ``Don't ask, don't tell'' was opposed by an overwhelming majority of Americans because it violated the values we claim to stand for as a Nation. It was not only tearing at our moral fabric; it was undermining our military readiness and national security as well. At a time when we're asking so much of our servicemembers, putting them on the front lines of two wars, we owe them, at the very least, and we have finally brought them the dignity of a discrimination-free workplace. I salute President Obama, and I salute our military brass for their leadership in reversing this injustice. I salute the Members of Congress, Democrat and Republican, who voted for the repeal. And of course we all owe a debt of gratitude to those who serve with honor and integrity, those who defended American rights and freedoms even when America wouldn't afford them the same rights and freedoms. So, Mr. Speaker, now there will be no sanctioned bigotry or homophobia in the Armed Forces of the greatest country on Earth. Our military will accept everyone who demonstrates their fitness to serve. Their sexuality will be irrelevant. They may be as open about it or as discreet about it as they choose. Good riddance to ``don't ask, don't tell.'' Our country will be stronger, safer, and fairer without it. And while we support our troops by eliminating this wrong-minded policy, let's take the next step and support all of our troops, regardless of their sexual orientation, by bringing them home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the legacy of a passionate and dedicated public servant. San Rafael Police Chief Matthew Odetto announced his retirement in July 2011, the culmination of thirty years of work serving the people and public safety of Marin County. His leadership has touched the lives of countless Mann residents, and his example has helped forge new bonds between our law enforcement organizations and the communities they serve. Odetto comes from a family with well-established roots in Marin County and in law enforcement. He started his career in 1981 as a deputy with the Marin County Sheriff's Office, based in Southern Marin, where he rose to the rank of Lieutenant. In that position, he served as commander of the Sheriff's SWAT team and was lead instructor for the Emergency Vehicle Operation Course. In 2000, Odetto became the Tiburon Chief of Police, a position he held for six years before his appointment as San Rafael Chief of Police in December 2006. Chief Odetto, firmly committed to maintaining services to San Rafael residents in spite of economic difficulties, guided the Police Department as it confronted newly limited resources. He built partnerships with community groups, solicited support from the private sector, and made community policing a priority. He secured new funding sources to ensure that gaps in resources were covered, eventually providing for the return of the Citizen's Academy program, which introduces the public to the work of the San Rafael Police Department and its law enforcement officers. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to join me in thanking Chief Odetto for his contributions to Marin County. He has set an admirable standard for compassionate and responsive public service, and we wish him the best in his retirement.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. I thank the ranking member for yielding to me. When the President spoke in this Chamber last week, he urged us to focus on jobs. Believe me, this outsourcer's bill wasn't what he had in mind. He demanded that we move urgently to create new jobs, certainly not jeopardize the ones we already have. This outsourcer's bill of rights is nothing more than a gift to the majority's corporate cronies. It gives unscrupulous employers the green light to retaliate against workers, to punish them for engaging in union activities, or for fighting for their rights as workers. And they do that by saying that it is perfectly okay to pick up and leave town, and they do that after the president of Boeing actually admitted the reason they were moving to South Carolina was because there was too much union activity in Seattle. That is retaliation, my folks. Someone tell me how exactly is this supposed to revive our economy? It's part of the Republican vendetta against workers and their collective bargaining rights. It's part of their orchestrated assault on the labor movement that built the American middle class. This is not the time to be undermining or threatening the job security of any American. It is time to defeat this bill and move immediately to pass a big, bold jobs bill, one that will put America back to work.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the U.S. embassy and NATO headquarters in Kabul were attacked. The Taliban, which we know has exerted its influence in many of the remote regions of the country, is now flexing its muscle in the supposedly secure capital. It's just the latest piece of evidence that the military occupation of Afghanistan is having exactly the opposite of its intended effect. Nearly a decade after we allegedly defeated the Taliban and drove them from power, they remain as fearless and undaunted as ever. The longer we have boots on the ground, the more we prop up the very enemy we are supposed to be fighting. And for this, the American people have the privilege of shelling out $10 billion a month. I ask my friends on the other side of the aisle, the ones who are lecturing us every day about cutting spending, isn't there something better we can do with the taxpayers' money? Well, it turns out there is, and it would do more to promote security and counterterrorism than waging a bloody and violent war. For years now, I've been promoting a platform I call ``SMART Security.'' SMART Security represents a wholesale change in the way we protect our country and promote our values abroad. It puts us in a position of partner, not invader. It's smart because it treats warfare as a very last resort. It's smart because it uses different tools to engage other nations and resolve global conflicts. It's smart because it emphasizes diplomacy, pursues multilateralism, promotes democracy, and respects human rights. And it's smart because it would dramatically increase our investment in international development projects that will lift people up instead of tearing their country down. What we need in Afghanistan and poor countries around the world is a civilian surge, one that will rebuild infrastructure, power lines, schools, hospitals, economic opportunity, and much more, whatever that nation would find useful that we could help with. You think it sounds expensive? It's a drop in the bucket. I'm talking about pennies on the dollar compared to a 10-year military occupation. In fact, The Washington Post noted last week that civilian efforts in Afghanistan have cost the United States about $1.7 billion over the last 2 years. Let's compare $1.7 billion over 2 years to $10 billion a month in Afghanistan. And even that level of funding is now facing tough scrutiny here on the Hill. Are you kidding me? Let's put this into perspective--$1.7 billion, we spend that much on the war in Afghanistan in less than a week, and that's what we invest in 2 years of civilian efforts. If we ended this war, we could reinvest the money in the bigger, bolder surge that we really need and still have plenty left over to create jobs right here at home and meet other important obligations. But right now, Mr. Speaker, our priorities are completely distorted. We are sacrificing the lives of our troops in a morally reprehensible war that is fiscally reckless and strategically an epic, historic failure. After 10 years, it's time to bring our troops home, make the change we so desperately need. Embrace and adopt the principles of SMART Security.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the career of an exceptional man and public servant. Peter Douglas has dedicated his life to defending our natural heritage and promoting conservation along the California Coast. Rarely does a single man cast such a long and positive shadow over our state; but as an architect of the California Coastal Commission, and as its longest-serving Executive Director, Douglas's contributions are truly incalculable. His retirement in November 2011 will mark the end of a proud era in the history of our environmental movement. Peter Douglas has long been a passionate fighter for a just cause. As a Jewish child born in Berlin in 1942, Douglas's early life was imbued with a special sense of purpose. Douglas eventually immigrated via Mexico to California, where he attended the University of California at Los Angeles, graduating with a law degree in 1969--months after the Santa Barbara oil spill, and just as the national environmental movement was beginning to make significant strides. Douglas wasted little time in putting his passion for public service to work, throwing his energy and expertise into the California campaign for 1972's Proposition 20. Douglas was key in drafting the language for the voter-approval initiative that created one of the country's most powerful land-use agencies, overseeing development across California's entire Coastal Zone. In 1985, he became the third Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission, a position he has held to this day. Under Douglas's tenure, the Coastal Commission has become a formidable instrument for ensuring that all Californians' voices are heard in development decisions affecting our unique coastal environment. Douglas has helped to expand public access to our beaches, limit private encroachment on public lands, and prevent the spread of pollution throughout our fragile ecosystem. His work has ensured that our coast remains above all a public landmark, inclusive of any individual who wishes to enjoy the same unspoiled natural wonder that has inspired others for generations. Countless organizations have acknowledged the impact Peter Douglas has made as an environmental pioneer. He is the recipient of awards from groups as varied as the National Resources Defense Council, the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Center, the California State Legislature, and the National Coast Trail Association. He was the first recipient of the Julius A. Stratton ``Champion of the Coast'' Award, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has named him a National Marine Sanctuaries Environmental Hero. Douglas has also participated in an advisory role on President Clinton's U.S. Panel on Ocean Exploration, the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Science and Policy for the Coastal Ocean, and many others. Throughout my tenure in the House of Representatives, I have had the special honor of calling Peter Douglas a constituent and a friend. A longtime resident of Marin County, Douglas has been a powerful advocate for the priorities that Marin residents hold dear and a staunch promoter of my legislation to extend federal Marine Sanctuary protection to the Sonoma coast. He has also had a hand in public service at the local level, co-founding community nonprofits and co- chairing one of California's first successful campaigns to enact a parcel tax to support local public schools. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to join me in recognizing a man who has made immense contributions to our environment, a man whose tireless advocacy has expanded the meaning of the public good. Peter Douglas's work has encouraged us to celebrate and protect the richness of our natural surroundings, and his legacy lives on in the unrivaled beauty of the coastline that defines California.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my colleague, Representative Mike Thompson, to recognize and honor J Vineyards and Winery of Healdsburg, which is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year. J was conceived and developed by Judy Jordan, an exuberant, fiercely independent 25-year-old who saw an opening in Sonoma County's wine landscape for a high quality, all-American sparkling wine brand. It was a lofty goal for a product that was first made in an old, ramshackle prune processing barn that routinely flooded when the nearby Russian River overflowed. From those humble beginnings, J sparkling wines have become some of the finest in the world. The winery's J Vintage Brut is a fixture on high profile wine lists and top hotels around the world. Queen Elizabeth sipped J at the White House. Mikhail Gorbachev spoke of world peace with a glass of J in his hand and J sparkling wines were the official celebratory bubbles of the Academy Awards Governors Ball for four consecutive years. To produce this remarkable wine, Ms. Jordan and her team rely on ten distinctive vineyard estate properties located throughout the Russian River Valley Appellation. These vineyards have at least twenty different soil profiles, with each vineyard displaying a different soil type and distinctive microclimate. This diversity allows J winemakers to coax the best flavor characteristics from each vineyard. Ms. Jordon also came to the realization that her vineyards would also be ideal for producing site-specific, cool-climate Russian River Valley varietal wines like Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, and Pinot Gris in addition to her sparkling wines. These wines were added to the portfolio and have become immensely popular products. The ten estate wines will be ``Certified Sustainable'' in 2012 by the California Sustainable Winegrowing Alliance. After a number of energy savings initiatives were implemented throughout the winery, J was named a ``Green Winery'' in 2010. One of the first wineries to offer food and wine pairings to visitors in the ``Bubble Room,'' J was named ``Best Winery Tasting Room'' by Sunset Magazine in 2009. Mr. Speaker, from its humble beginnings, J Vineyards and Winery has become an international success story and one of the linchpins of the Sonoma County wine industry. It is therefore appropriate that we honor them today on their Silver Anniversary.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleague Rep. Mike Thompson to honor the Sonoma County Indian Health Project on its 40th anniversary, celebrated August 19, 2011. Sonoma County Indian Health Project was founded in 1971 to provide healthcare to the Native American population residing in Sonoma County. Since its establishment, the Indian Health Project has grown considerably, serving evident unmet needs in our community, and leading to its move into the large, modern healthcare facility it occupies today. Through its relationship with the California Area Indian Health Service, the Sonoma County Indian Health Project assists in serving not only a large Native American population, but also a non-Indian population lacking sufficient access to care. Hundreds of families and individuals from communities across our region seek care at the facility each year, from traditional medical or dental treatment to nutritional consultation or transportation services for those in isolated areas. Supported by the Cloverdale, Dry Creek, Lytton, Graton, Manchester- Point Area, and Stewarts Point Rancherias, the Indian Health Project also puts an emphasis on providing its services in a manner that respects and contributes to Indian culture. It is a symbol of the strength and determination of our Native American community and a proud part of what makes our region unique. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to join us in thanking the Sonoma County Indian Health Project for its longstanding contributions to the health and welfare of Sonoma County, and in wishing the organization many more years of success.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, together with my colleague, Congressman Mike Thompson, to recognize Sandy Covall-Alves who is retiring after 30 years in the emergency management field, the last 16 of which was as Emergency Manager for Sonoma County's Fire & Emergency Services Department and the Sonoma County Operational Area. For those 30 years, she dedicated herself to making sure that people in her charge were safe and received the resources they need in the wake of natural disasters. During her tenure in Sonoma County, Ms. Covall-Alves coordinated the response, recovery and mitigation efforts for the 1995-1999 and 2006 winter storms and floods, the 1996 Cavedale fire, and the 1998 Rio Nido debris flow. In total, she oversaw the implementation of 14 local emergency proclamations, 12 Emergency Operations Center activations, 8 gubernatorial proclamations and 6 events that were designated by the President as national disasters. Our offices appreciated working with her, knowing that she knew how to pull all her connections together for a coordinated response. Ms. Covall-Alves was also the guiding force in establishing, implementing and coordinating emergency programs for the county, its cities and special districts. Her commitment to improving emergency management did not stop at the county line. She is a founding member and current Chair of the California Operational Area Coalition (COAC), a forum for information exchange and advocacy on emergency management issues. The COAC's mission is to enhance closer cooperation and collaboration with members of the organization and with the State Emergency Management Agency. Ms. Covall-Alves began her career in emergency management as a 9-1-1 dispatcher for the Tuolumne County Sheriffs Department. After developing disaster recovery plans for private businesses, she returned to public service with the San Mateo County OES and from there was deployed to the 1994 Northridge earthquake in Southern California as part of the state's mutual aid program. She joined Sonoma County OES in 1995 and quickly became an integral part of the county's response and recovery team. Mr. Speaker, Sandy Covall-Alves has had a long and distinguished career in serving and protecting the people of the State of California. We wish her well in her retirement as she enjoys time with her husband, Ron Alves, and their three special pets, Beelsey, Mowese and Wilson.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction holds its first organizational meeting; and it does this as it begins its work on reaching the spending cut benchmarks called for in the debt ceiling compromise. I have a suggestion for the 12 members who have been entrusted with this responsibility. I know exactly the place they should identify for their savings. It's a government program that's been notorious for waste and cost overruns. It's been cited many times over by neutral experts for its excess and inefficiency. It hasn't achieved its stated goals and it is deeply unpopular with the American people. I'll give you a hint. It's not Medicare or Social Security. It's not food stamps or unemployment benefits or Pell Grants or WIC. It's not any of the programs that comprise the safety net for our Nation. It's not any initiative designed to lift up the American people and giving them a chance to rise above difficult economic times. No. It's a decade-long effort that has been fiscally irresponsible, eroded our moral authority around the world, and cost our Nation more than 6,000 precious lives. That's right, Mr. Speaker, our ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are the perfect target for the spending cuts our country needs to restore fiscal balance. I have written a letter to the supercommittee, cosigned by 23 of my colleagues--so far, they're still signing on--strongly urging the committee to take a hard look at the overwhelming crippling costs of these wars. Afghanistan alone is costing the American people at least $10 billion a month, and to date, Iraq and Afghanistan combined have sucked the Treasury dry to the tune of a staggering $2.3 trillion--not million, not billion, $2.3 trillion. Frankly, this would be a rip-off at a fraction of the cost. If these wars were revenue neutral, if they carried no price tag at all, I would say it's not worth it. Just during the month of August, when Congress was in recess, 70 more brave Americans died in Afghanistan, making last month the single deadliest month of this 10-year war. The notion that things are looking up in Afghanistan is ridiculous on its face. Our continued occupation is impeding progress, not making it; fanning the flames of the insurgency instead of putting them out; making us less safe, not more. And for this, we are asking our people here in the United States to go without. Less than 12 hours from now, however, the President will be speaking from the Chamber, and he will be talking about his job creation strategy. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I fear, will react by saying we can't spend a dime more to solve our devastating economic crisis and put Americans back to work, yet the overwhelming majority of them have nothing at all to say about the trillions of dollars we've wasted and are continuing to spend on reckless, senseless, immoral wars. It's true that budgets are about choices. Which will we choose: the human destruction of seemingly endless wars abroad or the pressing human needs we have here at home? The supercommittee has a big job, Mr. Speaker. It will be grossly irresponsible for them to ignore one of the biggest ticket items when they're making their considerations. Let's help solve our budget crisis and our moral crisis at the same time by bringing our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on H.R. 2218, the Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act. During my first visit to a charter school years ago, when charter schools were first on the horizon, I was so impressed. I was impressed with the small class sizes. I was impressed with the level of parental involvement and the individualized learning programs. In fact, when I left the school, I was actually teary; I mean, I was overcome because I wanted every single child in the United States of America to have this same rich educational experience. All charter schools aren't quite that successful and all public schools aren't failing, but charter schools were created to develop best practices and innovative learning methods, and, if they were successful, those methods could be brought back and used in all public schools. While some charter schools have found new ways to promote academic achievement, other public schools have yet to benefit from this investment. This bill will return charter schools to their original mission by helping improve the public school system and ensuring that charters no longer operate in isolation without strict accountability. For many years, I've been concerned that charter schools, using taxpayer dollars, would function at the expense of public schools instead of complementing them. For instance, without reform, the most talented and motivated students could simply go to the charter schools, while public schools would be left with the most challenging situations, especially students with disabilities, English language learners, and students who come from broken homes and are having a hard time just keeping up in general. And that was totally contrary to the intent of the charter schools movement; it would weaken, rather than strengthen, our public school system. So to address this problem, this bill stood up and, in a very bipartisan way, our committee put together a bill that we have here on the House floor that requires charter schools to adopt practices that promote inclusion, that allow for increased enrollment of students with disabilities and limited English skills, and provides an information sharing system regarding systems programs. There are many other necessary reforms included in H.R. 2218, and they'll all ensure charter schools fill their original purpose. With these reforms, charter schools will play the constructive role in our education system that they were designed to play.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise with great pride today to honor Coast Guard Training Center Petaluma on the occasion of its 40th anniversary. Originally known as Two Rock Ranch Station, the 876-acre site was purchased by the U.S. Army for $97,377 in 1942 and used as an electronic intercept station in World War II. There were two officers and 45 enlisted men assigned to it. Two Rock's use was expanded during the Vietnam War to include training, with a re-created Vietnamese village. The Coast Guard took ownership of the facility in 1971, renaming it ``Coast Guard Training Center Petaluma'' and transferring the Subsistence Specialist School, Storekeeper School, and Radioman School from New York. Since that time, two barracks have been built (Steadman Hall and Horsley Hall) as well as 15 duplex housing units to provide affordable housing to the workforce. Several other buildings for use in training were also constructed (Bauer Building, Juliet-Nichols Building, and Haley Hall). The current replacement value of the facility is close to $245 million. During the 1990s, Coast Guard Training Center Petaluma was threatened with closure twice as the U.S. reevaluated its bases. The local community rallied in support, and I was able to work with them and with Coast Guard officials to keep this important facility open. Today, the Center is home to seven ``A'' schools for electronics, technician, food service specialist, health service technician, information system technician, operation specialist, storekeeper and Yeoman. There are also 40 ``C'' schools and a Chief Petty Officer Academy. With a permanently assigned cadre of 500 active duty, civilian, and contractor staff, the facility supports more than 15,000 students per year. Coast Guard Training Center Petaluma truly embodies its vision: To be a world leader in valid and reliable performance-based training; to be the best place to live and work in the Coast Guard; to be the best and most efficient steward of resources (money and property) in the Coast Guard training system; and to be the most environmentally-friendly Coast Guard base in the world. Having recently attended an event to throw the switch on solar panels that now provide much of the Center's electricity, I have seen first-hand how serious this vision is. Mr. Speaker, Coast Guard Training Center Petaluma is important to the local community and important to our country. Please join me in congratulating the Coast Guard on the facility's 40th anniversary and wishing it many more years of service.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. I move to strike the last word, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. WOOLSEY. As sure as Wednesday follows Tuesday, you can count on congressional Republicans to propose gutting programs benefiting the arts and humanities. It's as predictable as it is irresponsible and unwise. It's the same old penny-wise, pound-foolish approach we have come to expect from a party that wants to spend lavishly on corporate giveaways while cutting just about every initiative that empowers the American people and improves lives and our communities. I can't believe that while the Nation stands on the brink of default, while Republican stubbornness puts us less than a week away from economic calamity, we're having a debate about funding for the arts that represents 3 cents, 3 cents for every $100 of nonmilitary discretionary spending. Three cents, Mr. Chairman. Believe me, the budget for the National Endowment for the Arts isn't breaking the bank. Grants to support museums and theater companies are not what caused a huge deficit, and cutting them will not put us on a fiscally responsible course. In fact, investments in the arts more than pay for themselves. For every $1 spent on arts programs, the country gets back $9 in economic benefit. My friends on the other side of the aisle love to make arts funding a scapegoat. They never miss an opportunity to turn a spending debate into a culture war referendum on art. But let's be clear: The arts represent a vital economic industry, a mainstream employer of millions of Americans, and an integral part of a functioning society. The nonprofit arts sector generates more than $12 billion in tax revenues and more than $166 billion in economic activity every single year. Communities that have a vibrant artistic life are magnets for tourism and new businesses that create jobs. There's also evidence that communities that embrace the arts tend to have higher real estate values, more civic activities and volunteerism, less crime, and lower poverty rates. The arts are also a critical ingredient in the development of our children, with research showing that students receiving arts education perform better academically and are more likely to succeed in life. But despite all the ways that arts support the common good, Republican leaders want to cut NEA. Instead, Mr. Chairman, I think it's time we cut Big Oil subsidies and cut loopholes for corporate jet owners. Arts programs have already taken a budget hit in recent years and are trying to do more with less. If we can give billions in subsidies to oil companies that are already raking in record profits, then surely we can maintain modest investments in the nonprofit arts sector that makes a vital contribution to American life. Let's stop blaming small agencies for a fiscal crisis that was caused by three wars and tax cuts for the people who need them the least. Let's maintain robust funding for NEA. With that, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from Rhode Island.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.