[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 86 (Friday, May 23, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1069-E1070]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 22, 2008

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam Speaker, for the information of our 
colleagues and my constituents, I want the Record to reflect how I 
would have voted on the following votes I missed this session.
  On rollcall 134, to pass S. 2733, to temporarily extend the programs 
under the Higher Education Act of 1965, 1 would have voted ``yes.''
  On rollcall 154, on ordering the previous question on H. Res. 1605, 
providing for the consideration of H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry 
J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, 
and Malaria Reauthorization Act, I would have voted ``no.''
  I would have done so because defeating the previous question would 
have allowed the House to consider an amendment dealing with the 
appropriations earmark process. I support reforming that process and 
think that the House should at least debate changes to it, although I 
reserve judgment on whether I would have supported the specific 
language of the amendment since it was not debated.
  On rollcall 158, passage of H.R. 5501, Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde 
United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and 
Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, I would have voted ``yes.''
  On rollcall 162, passage of H.R. 2464, The Wakefield Act--I would 
have voted ``yes.''
  On rollcall 163, passage of S. 793, Reauthorization of the Traumatic 
Brain Injury Act--I would have voted ``yes.''
  On rollcall 182, on the Flake amendment to H.R. 2537, to bar use of 
funds provided under that bill for Congressional earmarks, I would have 
voted ``yes.''
  On rollcall 183, to suspend the rules and pass H. Res. 886, 
Expressing sympathy to the victims and families of the tragic acts of 
violence in Colorado Springs, Colorado and Arvada, Colorado, as a 
cosponsor of the resolution I would have voted ``yes.''
  As the resolution reminds us all, on Sunday, December 9, 2007, a 
troubled individual was responsible for killing several innocent people 
and injuring others at, first, the Youth With a Mission facility in 
Arvada and, a few hours later, at the New Life Church in the Colorado 
Springs area--where he was fatally shot by Jeanne Assam, a volunteer 
private security guard.
  The resolution rightly commends Ms. Assam and the quick response of 
local first responders in the city of Arvada and in Jefferson County as 
well as those in EI Paso County and Colorado Springs who, assisted by 
Federal authorities and medical professionals limited the danger to the 
church and local community. And it offers the heartfelt condolences of 
the House of Representatives to the victims and families of these 
tragic acts of violence in Colorado and coveys our gratitude to Jeanne 
Assam, city and county officials, as well as the police, fire, sheriff, 
Federal authorities, and

[[Page E1070]]

emergency medical teams whose quick response saved lives.
  On rollcall number 185, to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3548, as 
amended, the Plain Language in Government Communications Act, as a 
cosponsor of that measure I would have voted ``yes.''
  H.R. 3548 requires Federal agencies to use plain language in 
Government documents related to obtaining a service or a benefit. It 
responds to the fact that Government documents often are complex and 
difficult to understand, particularly when they are not written 
clearly. To address this problem, President Clinton in 1998 issued a 
memorandum that, in part, required Federal agencies to use plain 
language in all documents that explain how to obtain a benefit or 
service. However, while a few agencies still maintain plain language 
programs, efforts to promote plain language have waned. H.R. 3548 
defines plain language and requires agencies to use plain language in 
any new document that explains how to obtain a service or a benefit or 
that is relevant to obtaining a service or a benefit. The bill ensures 
that many of the letters, forms, and other documents that people 
receive from the Government will be written in a clear, understandable 
way. Under this bill, for example, the Social Security Administration 
would be required to use plain language in letters that provide 
beneficiaries information about Social Security.
  I joined in cosponsoring the bill because I think it is important for 
those of us in Government to do more to communicate clearly with our 
employers, the American people, and I hope that the Senate will join 
the House in giving prompt approval to the legislation.
  On rollcall number 331, to pass H.R. 6081, the Heroes Earnings 
Assistance and Relief Tax Act, I would have voted ``yes.''
  On rollcall number 332, to pass H.R. 6074, the Gas Price Relief for 
Consumers Act, I would have voted ``yes.''

                          ____________________