Greg Walden

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the gentleman from Michigan, I would just point out that when Democrats joined Republicans in voting for the 2012 middle class tax cut, we used $6.3 billion out of the Prevention Fund they now say they never touched, yet they have. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I would point out there are about 50,000 kids that Mr. Green may be voting against today in the Houston area if this goes down and we can't get this over to the Senate and work it out with them. Twice he has voted to cut the Prevention Fund and use it for other purposes. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance).

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Olson), a very important member of our committee.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we are here today to consider a very, very important public health bill, H.R. 3922, the CHAMPIONING HEALTHY KIDS Act. This legislation funds a 5-year extension of the Children's Health Insurance Program, known as CHIP, along with a 2-year extension of community health centers and numerous other critically important public health programs. This bill will deliver quality healthcare and peace of mind to millions of Americans. The patients and families helped by this legislation are our neighbors and our friends. More than 8 million children receive CHIP-funded coverage, and more than 25 million patients are served by our community health centers and other important programs. This 5-year funding of CHIP marks one of the longest extensions of the program since it was created 20 years ago. The policy we are considering mirrors the bipartisan policy that has been introduced and voted out of our sister committee in the United States Senate. Funding for these important programs expired September 30. The committee worked on a bipartisan basis well before this deadline to try and reach a bipartisan agreement on a range of policies to offset the costs of this very critically important funding extension. Three times, at the request of the Democrats, we delayed committee action--three times. We tried to find offsets that were agreeable as we have always been able to do before. Unfortunately, that was not the case this time. These delays meant Congress went past the deadline of September 30. While States still have rollover CHIP funds available and the next wave of community health center funds won't go out until next year, we cannot wait any longer. Patients cannot wait any longer. Patients need care, these critical programs need funding, and we must move forward. In my district alone, there are 12 federally qualified health center organizations, with 63 delivery sites. They leverage $41 million in Federal money in order to serve more than 240,000 patients in Oregon's Second District. These health centers--and I have visited many of them--are prevention and public health in action, often serving as the main provider of care for people for hundreds of miles around. We are also extending the National Health Service Corps and the Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education program. Now, Mr. Speaker, these are really important workforce programs that place qualified providers into some of the most underserved areas of our country. In addition to community health centers and the workforce programs, this bill extends the funding for the Special Diabetes Program and the Family-to-Family Health Information centers, the Personal Responsibility Program, and the Youth Empowerment Program. These locally based, patient-centered organizations provide comprehensive services to those most in need. Moreover, this legislation eliminates 2 years of the across-the-board cuts to Medicaid allotments called for under the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. We delay those cuts for disproportionate share hospitals for 2 years. Medicaid DSH funding represents an important component of many State Medicaid programs and is particularly relied upon by many States to help provide additional resources to key safety net providers. Now, while this relief is only temporary and does not address the larger structural challenges under ObamaCare, it would give Congress time to explore what budget-neutral approaches there might be to allocate existing DSH dollars on a more equitable and fair basis. In my State alone of Oregon, hospitals have told me this relief in this bill, just for them, represents $6.8 million over the next 2 years that they can use to help low-income people get access to hospital care. Now, in paying for this package--and this is the area where we have the most disagreement with the Democrats--we have taken a fiscally responsible approach, like using existing funding streams for prevention and public health efforts, ensuring high-dollar lottery winners are removed from the Medicaid program so its limited resources can be prioritized for the most vulnerable, and stopping individuals on the Affordable Care Act's exchanges from gaming the system. The bill also asks Medicare's wealthiest 1 percent, people who are retired and making $40,000 a month--not a year, a month--to pay about $135 more for their Medicare just on parts B and D that is already subsidized by 75 percent, just a little more so we can fund children's health insurance for 5 years. While it was not ultimately possible, unfortunately, to reach consensus on some of the policies to offset the new funding in this bill, there is broad bipartisan agreement on the core policies contained in this legislation, and I believe there is bipartisan support for many of the reasonable and fiscally responsible offsets contained in H.R. 3922. Mr. Speaker, this is good legislation. This is long-overdue legislation. It reflects the good work done by your House Energy and Commerce Committee, and I urge my colleagues to put politics aside today and ensure these vital programs get the funding extensions they need. We are over the deadline. It is time to act. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, before I call on my next person to say something here, there are 17,000 children in Mr. Pallone's district and 14 health centers that, if he votes ``no,'' he will be voting against. By the way, the offset he recommended, people who are watching this need to know, would violate statute and it would be a PAYGO violation. That is why it was not acceptable. See, this is the problem we faced. We delayed three times at their request only to be offered up a pay-for that violates statute and violates our PAYGO rules. We could not accept that. We have to operate within the law like everyone else in America. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond. Mr. Speaker, my friend, and she is my friend from California, obviously was not aware of the fact that it was her party, her leader, who asked us on three occasions to delay bringing this to the floor, including you could look at the CQ article from October 23 where Mr. Pallone says he hopes it doesn't come to the floor. This was a bipartisan agreement not to bring it until we could try to work these things out. We were all trying to figure out how to get this done. When it comes to Medicare, remember, we are talking about people making $40,000 a month paying $135 a month more. We can fully fund children's health insurance for millions of children. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), the conference chairwoman.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), an incredible advocate for children and healthcare in America.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 601, I call up the bill (H.R. 3922) to extend funding for certain public health programs, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Before I call on my next colleague, I just want to point out that, in Ms. Schakowsky's district, all we are talking about here is seniors making $41,000 a month--a month--would pay an extra 135 bucks so we can fully fund children's health insurance, community health centers. All these programs in here are funded. We use the Prevention Fund, which is not allocated out in the out-years. It is just a pot of money you can use for prevention and wellness. We actually use that to fund this as well. This is why we have been unable to reach agreement with the Democrats. It is sad they have made this partisan. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa).

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, today, Members of this House can deliver peace of mind to parents of over 8 million low-income children who depend on the Children's Health Insurance Program. The House can extend funding for important public health programs, including resources for the critical work community health centers do in our communities and in my district and yours. This bill will help deliver much-needed healthcare resources to our friends and fellow citizens in the Virgin Islands and in Puerto Rico. Yet we have heard complaints about how this package is paid for. Well, let us be clear how this bill funds healthcare for kids and important public health priorities like community health centers. In paying for this package, we have taken a fiscally responsible and reasonable approach. Our bill funds kids' healthcare by allowing States to dis-enroll lottery winners--these are winners making $80,000 or above--from the low-income Medicaid program. We ensure high-dollar lottery winners are removed from the Medicaid program so that those resources can go to Medicaid-eligible, low-income people in our districts. Our bill directs funding from the Prevention and Public Health Fund to finance important prevention and public health needs, like funding the National Health Service Corps, Teaching Health Center Graduate Medical Education, Family-to-Family Health Information Centers, and community health centers. If these are not important programs for prevention, wellness, and public health, I don't know what are. Our bill before us today, which I predict will have bipartisan support, directs funds from the Prevention Fund for important public health priorities that have long had bipartisan support. We are using a bipartisan fund to pay for bipartisan healthcare support for health and wellness, which was its intent from the beginning. Most recently, nearly every House Republican and Democrat supported this idea just a year ago. Just a year ago, when we passed the 21st Century Cures Act, we said: Here is a health and wellness fund and a Prevention Fund that makes sense for cures, make sense for, we believe today, our community health centers, and for Children's Health Insurance. Our bill also asks the wealthiest among us, the 1 percent of beneficiaries, those making $40,000 a month, over half-a-million dollars a year--that is an individual--to pay a little more to help fund health insurance for low-income children. I think they are willing to do that, and I think we should be as well. On multiple budgets, President Obama said this is a reasonable way to pay for other priorities. That was bipartisan. It is bipartisan today. These reasonable pay-fors have been opposed by some in the Democratic leadership. Some House Democrats want to use children's healthcare and funding for community health centers as a bargaining chip for a bigger end-of-the-year goulash, yet kids and our frontline providers can't wait any longer. In just a few weeks, States like Minnesota run out of funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program. At the request of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, we have agreed to postpone it time and again, but time has run out. The negotiations did not end as we all hoped they would. But we can't wait any longer. It is time for this House to deliver peace of mind to the families that rely on these critical programs. It is time to vote ``yes.'' Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to recommit and to approve the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order against the motion to recommit.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Guthrie from Kentucky. He has done a terrific job on the Energy and Commerce Committee on many fronts related to improving healthcare, especially for seniors and low- income Americans, among others. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 849. This is the Protecting Seniors' Access to Medicare Act of 2017. This will repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board, IPAB. The purpose of IPAB is to reduce Medicare's per capita growth rate. While, certainly, that is important work, this is not the solution. The IPAB, created by the Affordable Care Act, would be composed of 15 unelected bureaucrats authorized to unilaterally make decisions regarding Medicare's finances, whether that be through draconian cuts to provider payments or by imposing policy changes that would reduce Medicare spending if the program exceeds an arbitrary growth rate target. In other words, they can do just about anything they want to cut Medicare, and we don't have much of a say in it. These changes would automatically go into effect, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services would be forced to implement these reductions should IPAB be triggered, unless Congress passed legislation that would achieve the same amount of savings. It is also worth noting that current law does not require a public comment period before IPAB issues their recommendations, so there would be no chance for the public to weigh in. And individuals and providers would have no recourse against the board--can you imagine that?--as its decisions are not subject to appeal or judicial review. This is hardly a model of transparency and accountability. While IPAB hasn't been constituted yet, the threat of this provision of law remains. So I cannot support IPAB. I never have, because its potential cuts to providers, our doctors and hospitals and others and healthcare facilities would increase out-of-pocket costs for seniors and potentially limit the availability of medical services, restricting seniors' access to care, particularly in our rural areas. Congress can and should act now to prevent IPAB and prevent the unelected bureaucrats from ever being at the helm of our country's Medicare Program. I know the importance of this program. It took very good care of my parents, my wife's parents, and others I know. We should reject the premise of surrendering our oversight and our responsibility to preserve and protect the Medicare Program to a board with the power to make binding decisions about Medicare policy, with little accountability. We know how to make sure seniors have an affordable, sound, reliable healthcare system. We have to create competition at every turn in the healthcare system and look for models that work, like Medicare part D.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from the Rules Committee, my colleague from across the river in Washington State. My apologies to Washingtonians because one of our fires, the Eagle Creek fire, actually spotted across the mighty Columbia River, set fire to part of the forests in Washington State down near Stevenson. Fortunately, that fire was extinguished. The one on the Oregon side was terribly dangerous, man-caused, human-caused. It blew out 14 miles in one night headed toward Portland. These are monster fires. We lost 678,000 acres this year to forest fires in my great State of Oregon. It is about two-thirds of the entire size of the State of Rhode Island. It is enormous. This is happening year after year, and the consequences are extraordinary. Smoke chokes our airsheds. Schools literally had to shut down and send kids home because it was too smoky to have them inside the school. The 30th anniversary of Cycle Oregon was canceled. That is a major annual bicycle ride that occurs; 30 years, the 30th anniversary, canceled. They couldn't find a way to pull it off. The Shakespeare Festival down in Ashland, nine performances had to be canceled; $400,000, Mr. Speaker, just in ticket receipts that had to be foregone. I am told they had to lay off people as a result. When you think about not only the lost forests--this is what a forest looks like after it is burned--the ground is often sterilized. You can't even go back and replant for a year or two in some cases because there is no soil left. The impacts are enormous on our environment. Those of us who are concerned about the environment, about carbon emissions into the atmosphere, in 2015, when a like amount was burned in Oregon, the Forest Service estimated the blazes emitted more than 90,000 tons of fine particulates and 14.2 million tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. That is equivalent to more than 3 million cars; 3 million cars. The cause of these increasingly catastrophic fires, as Dr. John Bailey of the Oregon State University's College of Forestry pointed out during a hearing earlier this month in our Energy and Commerce Committee, in some cases, the forest landscapes in my part of Oregon, eastern Oregon that would have historically held about 20 trees per acre, have more than 1,000 trees growing there today. You see, we have stopped management. In many cases, we have stopped fire. The forests continue to grow, and die, and build, and get more dense, and so when fire does strike, it is with devastating consequence. My friend from Florida, and he is my friend, when he gets thunderstorms in Florida in the summer, he gets a lot of rain with it, I bet. If we have thunderstorms in Oregon, we don't get the rain. We went nearly 90 days without any rain, but we still got lightning. The lightning torches these forests and starts a lot of these blazes. A 2014 study in California by the Nature Conservancy, Forest Service, and others found that these types of projects can reduce the intensity of fires up to 70 percent.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. My intensity of this issue is almost that of the fires we fight. We can reduce the size and intensity of fires by 70 percent if we do the kinds of projects that thin out the forest, better manage, and be better stewards of our public Federal forests that are contemplated as a result of this legislation. In Oregon, this bill would take away an arbitrary prohibition on harvesting trees over 21 inches in diameter that has tied the hands of our forest managers. We would clarify timber production mandates of the unique Oregon-California lands in southern and western Oregon to live with the underlying statute and actually have it enforced. When fires do happen, we would exchange this for a new, healthy forest that would grow green trees that sequester carbon and restore a landscape that we in the West so enjoy. It is long past time to fix our broken forest policy. I commend the Rules Committee for bringing this bill forward, and I commend Mr. Westerman, Mr. Bishop, and others who have worked on this on both sides of the aisle to help us stop the fires that ravage, and kill, and destroy, and to help us have healthy, green forests.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I really want to thank our Members on both sides of the aisle, and especially the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie), who has an identical bill, the House companion bill to this one. S. 652 revises the Public Health Service Act's expanding access to critical resources for the deaf and hard-of-hearing newborns and young children. It will boost training of healthcare professionals in helping these young parents and ensure that, in turn, they can help educate the patient's family members. This bill will also deliver relief to parents and caretakers of young children that have hearing loss, granting them important resources to aid in their care. Again, the Health Subcommittee vice chair, Brett Guthrie, is the author of the House companion. When the House today approves this legislation, which I assume it will, that means this bill will go to the President's desk and be signed into law. This is really important work that the Energy and Commerce Committee is doing, once again, in a big and bipartisan way. It is an important bill that will expand access to critical resources for deaf and hard-of-hearing newborns and young children. By updating and reauthorizing HRSA and CDC grants to help States treat children with hearing loss, we are doing our work to achieve better outcomes for patients. I am particularly pleased about the potential to harness new and improved data collection systems to improve access. You know, if we can better understand what is happening with patients on the ground, we can make better decisions about where to allocate resources to help recruit more providers and improve coordination of care for children with hearing loss. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted with the work of the Health Subcommittee and the Members who have put so much into this legislation, and I look forward to the House passing it.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arizona for yielding and for his leadership on this, and to my other colleagues from the West, who understand what we face, the problems we face, and what has happened to our forests. I stand united with all of you in the Western Caucus, because this is something we have done some work on in the past and then we have been stalled out, especially in the last 8 years. I know that President Trump stands with us, wanting to pass legislation, get it down to his desk so he can sign it so we can begin to be better stewards of our great public forests, these public forest lands important to all of us. As we saw painfully this summer, smoke chokes our citizens, it chokes children. Literally, in my district, elementary school children had to be sent home because of the smoke in their schools because of forest fires. In Oregon, we have seen some of the worst fires in our State's history. It seemed as if every day came with new reports of more fire, more smoke. While this year's fire season has been particularly intense and devastating, images like these are nothing new for Oregonians. Each summer, smoke has filled our skies in Oregon year after year after year. Vast swaths of our land in our beautiful State are charred. Unlike private forest owners, the State of Oregon, which I am very proud to be a resident of, and our forest policy and tribal lands and county lands, after a fire, they go in and clean it up, they replant, they get a new, healthy, young forest growing, which if you are concerned about reducing carbon emissions, you want healthy trees, because they actually sequester carbon. Burned, dead, decaying old trees actually emit carbon. So we can do good things for the ecology of our world by planting new trees after a fire. We will talk about that in a minute. Smoke inhalation has become a health hazard for Oregonians in their communities. I can't tell you how many in my communities, day after day after day, were given warnings by our health authority that the air was too dangerous to breathe, that it was unhealthy to breathe. A recent study found that wildfires contribute three times as much fine particulate matter into the air as previously thought, and this definitely can cause respiratory problems and make it difficult to breathe, as the citizens of our great State found this summer. Wildfires also pollute our atmosphere with carbon. In 2002, the Biscuit fire in southwest Oregon burned more than 500,000 acres, half a million acres. The carbon dioxide emitted during that fire amounted to almost one-quarter of the carbon dioxide emitted in the entire State of Oregon this year. By the way, we have burned 678,000 acres this year in Oregon at a cost of more than $340 million to fight those fires, State, local, and Federal costs, mostly Federal. Tomorrow, the Energy and Commerce Committee, which I chair, will hold a hearing to take a look at the air impact of fires, in part because I have constituents who have seen that, in some cases, fires are not aggressively fought if they are in certain federally designated areas, wilderness areas. There is a temptation, apparently, to not use all our tools, and to instead let them burn. That doesn't take into account what happens to air quality and the health of our citizens when fires are allowed to ravage and burn. So we will take a look at the issues involving air quality and pollutants emitted into the atmosphere and discuss how better management of our forests could help prevent catastrophic fires and actually protect our airshed and our health. Each of us today faces a similar situation. Devastating fires ignite across the West as fuel loads build across our public lands--Mr. McClintock did a great job laying that out--while broken Federal forest policy stands in the way of better management, healthier air, protection of our habitat and our watersheds and our streams and our forested communities. 8.2 million acres burned this year. By the way, my colleagues, that is an area larger than Maryland, it is three-and-a-half or so times the size of, I believe, Puerto Rico, which has been wiped out. We talk about the devastation and disaster there and in the Virgin Islands and every other place, but somehow we sort of overlook the fact that we lose this almost every year in our West and in our forested land. Communities watched their mills close, meanwhile, as Federal policy and lawsuits and litigation has prevented proper management of our forests. So we have lost our jobs, we have lost our infrastructure, we have lost the revenues for our schools, and, in some cases, for basic services like law enforcement. Now, promises that somehow recreation and outdoor activities would replace those good family-wage jobs, tourism, they are falling short, because guess what, events are being canceled because now the fires are destroying the airshed. Constituents of mine have been sending photos this year about some of the fires. This one right here is from Mike, who was returning from a hunting trip just a few weeks ago. This was the Eagle Creek fire burning in the scenic Columbia River Gorge area between Cascade Locks and where I live in Hood River. We had an evacuation notice within a half a mile of where I live on Rand Road. It was level 1, but they had them higher than that as you got closer to this fire. Meanwhile, events like Cycle Oregon, its 30th anniversary, canceled because of the smoke; Sisters Folk Festival canceled because of the smoke. Down in Ashland, the Oregon Shakespeare Theater, world-renowned festival, they had to cancel nine of their shows at a cost of $400,000 direct revenue loss, not to mention the concerns they have about indirect loss, people who didn't show up for other performances, and might even affect their annual sales. People are really tired of this. They expect this Congress to take action to try and protect and become good stewards of our national forest land, but this picture tells you what we faced. The Columbia Gorge, where I grew up right near here, I can't remember a time the freeway was closed as long as it was this summer. We had to go over across the river to Washington to our good friends on Highway 14. All the freeway traffic was diverted there, and there is still one lane here that can't pass, because now we are worried about mudslides and rockslides and trees coming down the hillsides. We need to get back to positive, active management in our Federal forests. Five years in a row, the U.S. House has enacted legislation, sent it over to the Senate, that would give our professional foresters, our scientists, the tools that they clamor for and need to better manage our forests and reduce the overloading of debris, of dead and dying trees, open up these stands to what they should be naturally, get back in balance with nature. Every year this goes over to the other body, and somehow it never comes back. That has to change. So tonight, I thank my friend from Arizona who organized this. He knows what forest fires are like in Arizona. My colleague from Washington, my colleague from California, myself, our colleague from Montana, we have dealt with this year after year after year. Now, more than half of the Forest Service budget is spent fighting fire. That is not what we should do as a matter of bad policy. We need to change Federal policy. We need to let our scientists manage these forests, restore jobs to our forested communities, protect our airsheds, our watersheds, and get back in balance. So I commend my colleagues in the Western Caucus for moving this forward. I just finished a very positive meeting with the Speaker of the House, who is committed to helping us on this matter. I look forward to us having the opportunity to vote on the Resilient Federal Forests bill and get our Senate colleagues on board as well.

Mr. WALDEN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I hope they will tune in tomorrow and watch the testimony at that hearing. I think they will get a better understanding of what the people in our districts have faced. For a month this summer, schools had to be closed, festivals canceled, people choking, going to the hospitals. This is serious stuff, and we need to address it.

Mr. WALDEN. We appreciate it.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the twenty World War II veterans and one Korean War veteran from Oregon who are visiting their memorial on the National Mall on Saturday, September 30th, 2017 through Honor Flight of Oregon. Every time I have the chance to meet one of these heroes from the ``Greatest Generation,'' I am reminded of the poignant words of General Dwight D. Eisenhower. In a message to Allied troops just before D-Day, he said, ``The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere march with you.'' He was right then, of course, Mr. Speaker. But over seventy years later, liberty-loving people everywhere continue to owe these heroes for their extraordinary service and their incredible stories of sacrifice and bravery on behalf of our country. That's why it is my privilege to enter their names into the Congressional Record today. The veterans on this Honor Flight from Oregon are as follows: William Cochran, Army; Warren Davis, Army; Richard Fultineer, Army; William Johnson, Army; John Ritz, Army; Jack Downs, Army Air Force; Lawrence Willis, Army Air Force; Charles Kriegh, Marine Corps; Hiram Underwood, Marine Corps; Harry Howard Jr., Merchant Marine; John Webber, Merchant Marine; Raymond Ayers, Navy; Ernest Gallo, Navy; Paul Gessford, Navy; Lawrence Horton, Navy; Stanley Luther, Navy; Lester Manosar, Navy; Harold Simpson Sr., Navy; Orville Stoltz, Navy; Gerhard Tank, Navy; and Paul Vincent, Navy. These twenty-one heroes join over 150,000 veterans who have been honored through the Honor Flight Network of volunteers nationwide since 2005. I would also like to recognize the fourteen guardians traveling on this trip who have also served our country: Leon Clay Jr., Air Force; Charles Wills, Air Force; Ronald Kohl, Army and Air Force; Lyle Gessford, Army; Steven Howard, Army; Terry Wynkoop, Army; Gordon Wood, Marine Corps; Laurie Dutton, Navy; Terry Haines, Navy; David Haines, Navy; Chester Johnson, Navy; Larry Kennedy, Navy; Richard Santillie, Navy; and Tanya Wilson, Navy. I would also like to recognize Richard Wing Jr., who served our Veterans for 36 years as an RN at the VA Hospital, in Palo Alto, California. And, of course, none of this would be possible without Gail Yakopatz, the longtime President of Honor Flight of Oregon. Gail has assisted hundreds of veterans, has been a tireless advocate for Oregon's veterans and is someone I am proud to call my friend! Mr. Speaker, at the height of the Civil War in 1863, President Abraham Lincoln wrote, ``Honor to the Soldier, and Sailor everywhere, who bravely bears his country's cause.'' Each of us in this Chamber and in this nation should be humbled by the courage of these brave veterans who put themselves in harm's way for our country and way of life. As a nation, we can never fully repay the debt of gratitude owed to them for their honor, commitment, and sacrifice in defense of the freedoms we have today. My colleagues, please join me in thanking these veterans and the volunteers of Honor Flight of Oregon for their exemplary dedication and service to this great country.

Mr. WALDEN

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 931) to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop a voluntary registry to collect data on cancer incidence among firefighters, as amended.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, we all join in thanking our first responders. This is the least of the things we can do to show how much we care about our firefighters, and I would encourage our colleagues in the House to support this very important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, the gentleman who helped move this legislation forward, and leads our committee on matters of health.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance), another very important member of our Energy and Commerce Committee, who I know had many constituents horribly affected by the tragic events of 9/11.