mr. clark's that this be? >> he will be deputy cfo with sara. will be working on a very carpet -- part-time basis. he is a tjpa employee. he is not a consultant and has not been a consultant. he has always been a tjpa employee. his hours would become less and less. >> and his compensation accordingly? >> yes. he is in his mid to late 80's, 70's? he is prepared to retire. >> i certainly support the appointment and refer to your dad on this, but isn't a law by the tjpa that you did not have the authority to make this appointment? >> there are certain position that we bring directly to the board. that would be the board secretary, chief financial officer position, as well as general counsel position. general counsel position is now in dennis herrera. that was from a board resolution quite a while ago. nila was appointed earlier. the chief financial officer, and of course, my position. those are the only one that would come to this body. >> surprised we still have dennis, but i guess we still do. all right, motion, 2nd. any speakers? >> no members o

mr. clarke: thank you. madam speaker, i offer this congress and this country a simple yet powerful way to create new, good-paying manufacturing jobs in the united states. and that's by investing in detroit, by allowing the tax dollars that detroiters pay to be invested back in detroit. invested to help make the streets of detroit safer, to help improve detroit's schools, to help train detroiters for jobs, to help rebuild our city. you see, this type of investment will definitely create jobs in detroit. but more importantly detroit's manufacturing know-how, our trained work force, investing in detroit will help put americans back to work. so by helping put detroiters back to work you're going to help put this country back to work. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for one-minute speeches has expired. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on the additional motion to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the y

into their profit margins and create shortages for people who wait until the last minute to shop, mr. clarkn between longshoremen and their bosses got heated in longview, washington with the arrest of a dozen people. it happened when protestors blocked a train track yesterday. one by one officers led protestors away, but at one time a scuffle broke out between two men and police. officers tackled the men and spray -- pepper-sprayed them. protestors are now facing felony assault charges. >>> our time is 7:50. you won't believe what one kindergartner brought to school for show and tell. how his mom ended up in jail. and a health threat for horses, a virus in the bay area. that's where their favorite cereals like trix and cocoa puffs can help. general mills big g has the only leading line of kid cereals with at least eight grams of whole grain and a good source of calcium. look for the white check on the cereals they already love... like cinnamon toast crunch and lucky charms. help them grow up strong with general mills kid cereals. ♪ >>> a mother in st. louis is out on bail after her little b

mr. clark from michigan. >> thank you, mr. chair. my question to the entire panel is how can the department of homeland security best judge in urban areas risk of an attack based on the assessment that it uses now? i represent metropolitan detroit. we have a large international airport hub. that airport was the destination of the plane that the christmas day bomber attempted to blow up. there is a strong likelihood that our region could be the target of another attack. now in addition to the likelihood of an attack, the department also needs to look at the consequences of an attack. metropolitan metropolitan detroit did not use that as an example. we have a large population center. we have a border that is water, that is also the busiest international border crossing in terms of trade in north america. we also have a large regional drinking water system. my concern is mini metro detroiters are at risk of being poisoned if a terrorist decides to dump a bunch of biological agents in the drinking water system. so essentially, the gao re

mr. clark from michigan. >> thank you, mr. chair. my question to the entire panel is how can the department of homeland security best judge in urban areas risk of an attack based on the assessment that it uses now? i represent metropolitan detroit. we have a large international airport hub. that airport was the destination of the plane that the christmas day bomber attempted to blow up. there is a strong likelihood that our region could be the target of another attack. now in addition to the likelihood of an attack, the department also needs to look at the consequences of an attack. metropolitan metropolitan detroit did not use that as an example. we have a large population center. we have a border that is water, that is also the busiest international border crossing in terms of trade in north america. we also have a large regional drinking water system. my concern is mini metro detroiters are at risk of being poisoned if a terrorist decides to dump a bunch of biological agents in the drinking water system. so essentially, the gao re

mr. clarke: mr. speaker, nearly 10 years after the horrific events of 9/11, americans are still at risk. especially at risk of being poisoned, poisoned by terrorists who would choose to dump large amounts of chemicals into our drinking water supply. so in order to protect the safety of our people, especially metro detroiters who drink water from a large municipal water system, today you i'm introducing legislation to better secure or municipal water systems all around this country from such a terrorist threat. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. are there any other requests for one-minute remarks? the chair lays before the house the following personal request. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. ber leta of pennsylvania -- berleta of pennsylvania for thursday, september 8, and for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the

mr. clark from michigan. >> thank you, mr. chair. my question to the entire panel is how can the department of homeland security best judge in urban areas ri of an attack based on the assessment that it uses now? i represent metropolitan detroit. we have a large international airport hub. that airport was the destination of the plane that the christmas day bomber attempted to blow up. there is a strong likelihood that our region could be the target of another attack. now in addition to the lielihood of an attack, the department also needs to look at the consequences of an attack. metropolitan metropolitan detroit did not use that as an example. we have a large population center. we have a border that is water, that is also the busiest ternational border crossing in terms of trade in north america. we also have a large regional drinking water system. my concern is mini metro detroiters are at risk of being poisoned if a terrorist decides to dump a bunch of biological agents in the drinking water system. so essentially, the gao report

clarke: thank you, mr. speaker, and i thank the gentleman from new jersey for yielding the time. today i rise in opposition to h.r. 2587. this bill, which was rammed through committee without so much as a legislative hearing, does not create or protect jobs in spite of its misleading title. what this bill does is give american workers an unfair choice -- your rights or your job. h.r. 2587 creates an open season for c.e.o.'s to punish workers for exercising their rights. this bill allows companies to relocate or eliminate jobs in retaliation against employees who exercise their right to organize, strike or engage in collective bargaining activity. this republican sponsored bill accomplishes this by eliminating the national labor relations board's power to order -- be reinstated. in practical terms this would mean if a c.e.o. would want to punish workers for unionizing or striking, the employer could relocate and thereby eliminating the worker without fear of being held accountable. i ask colleagues to vote -- to oppose this bill and vote it down today. thank you very much, mr. spe

clarke: thank you, mr. speaker, and i tnk the gentleman from new jersey for yielding the time. today i rise in opposition to h.r. 2587. this bill, which was rammed through committee without so much as a legislative hearing, does not create or protect jobs in spite of its misleading title. what this bill does is give american workers an unfair choice -- your rights or your job. h.r. 2587 creates an open season for c.e.o.'s to punish works for exercising their rights. this bill allows companies to relocate or eliminate jobs in retaliation against employees who exercise their right to organize, strike or engage in collective bargaining activity. is republican sponsored bill accomplishes this by eliminating the national labor relations board's power to order -- be reinstated. in practical terms this would mean if a c.e.o. would want to punish workers for unionizing or striking, the employer could relocate and thereby eliminating the worker without fear of being held accountable. i ask colleagues to vote -- to oppose this bill and vote it down today. thank you very much, mr. speaker

the circuit clark did not make any other effort to contact the firm or mr. maples in prison. the deadline for his appeal passed on post conviction. in the habeas proceeding, when he learned the deadline had passed, he was lucky and and got to attorneys, very good attorneys, but the alabama courts were clear he had defaulted, failed to appeal his post conviction, his denial of post conviction release, and the 11th circuit has also said he defaulted procedurally and he is not able to raise his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. the court will have to deal with that issue coming out of alabama, and deal with the plea issues. and are at least two other cases. and we have to presume the court wants to say something comprehensive, perhaps, about this that would justify them taking the set of cases. >> we have about 30 minutes left, and i want to save 20 minutes for questions. we have been talking so far about the cases at the supreme court, that they have granted certiorari and have agreed to hear, but there is a bunch of stuff people think they might hear. i cannot predic

clark. i'm sorry, from michigan. >> thank you, mr. chair.panel is how can the department of homeland security best judge an urban area's risk of an attack based on the assessments used now? we have in large international airport hub in detroit. that airport was the destination of the plane that the christmas day bomber attempted to blow up, so there's some likelihood that our region could be the target of another attack. now, in addition to the likelihood of an attack, the department also needs to look at the consequences of an attack. metropoll tan detroit, i'll use that as an example, we have a large population center. we have a border that is water that is also the busiest international border crossing in terms of trade in north america. we also have the large regional drinking water system, and my concern is that many metro detroiters are at risk of being poisenned if a terrorist decides to dump a bunch of bilogical agents in that drinking water system, so essentially it's this -- the gao report mentioned concerns about how the departmen

the circuit clark did not make any other effort to contact the firm or mr. maples in prison. the deadline for his appeal passed on post conviction. in the habeas proceeding, when he learned the deadline had passed, he was lucky and and got to attorneys, very good attorneys, but the alabama courts were clear he had defaulted, failed to appeal his post conviction, his denial of post conviction release, and the 11th circuit has also said he defaulted procedurally and he is not able to raise his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. the court will have to deal with that issue coming out of alabama, and deal with the plea issues. and are at least two other cases. and we have to presume the court wants to say something comprehensive, perhaps, about this that would justify them taking the set of cases. >> we have about 30 minutes left, and i want to save 20 minutes for questions. we have been talking so far about the cases at the supreme court, that they have granted certiorari and have agreed to hear, but there is a bunch of stuff people think they might hear. i cannot predic

mr. crone game, swung by my office and we went to see him in the afternoon. >> all right. can i turn to the letter, which clarkmarc march 2007. in that letter, he suggested that the grounds on which -- [inaudible] were you aware of of that, that was going to be his argument? >> i didn't know anything about his letter. until quite recently. i think he came and asked me questions about .2 is making in his dismissal but i certainly wasn't aware it was all contained in a letter, nor did i have sight of the letter. >> but one of the key points he makes in the letter, they shouldn't come as a shock, because. [inaudible] sticky certainly makes that suggestion but that's not true. >> and not to? >> not true. i attended one legal conference he had, the first one. and then on the second occasion he said he didn't want me there. the entire meeting. that was relayed through his attorney. but the assistant said i could come in at some stage and, indeed, i was sitting outside and getting quite a long time, and i came in for the last 20 minutes. >> so virtually attended virtually every meeting? >> yes. it's also wrong i hear