December 10, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E2379 

On November 13 of this year, a Turkish 

warship issued threats to two foreign flagged 

maritime vessels conducting an exploratory 

survey at the request of the Government of 

Cyprus, within its exclusive economic zone, 

EEZ. The Turkish warship claimed that these 

vessels had entered into Turkey’s EEZ. Fearing retaliation, the exploratory ships withdrew. 

However, at the time of this threat, these two 

ships had been located 27 miles off the coast 

of Cyprus, which is included within its EEZ 

boundaries. 

In addition to this most recent incident, Turkey has used the waters of the Republic of 

Cyprus to conduct military exercises numerous 

times. Furthermore, even after Cyprus’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, 

Minas Hadjimichael, and President of the Republic of Cyprus, Demetris Christofias, notified 

the U.N. Secretary-General of the November 

13th Turkish provocation, Turkish warships 

continue to harass ships within Cyprus’s EEZ. 

Turkey’s recent violations of international 

maritime law not only jeopardize the possibility 

for the re-unification of Cyprus, but they also 

endanger global security. In just one month, 

Turkey is to become a non-permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, the same 

governing body that has frequently denounced 

Turkey’s disregard for Cyprus’s sovereignty. If 

Turkey violates the conditions to which it 

agreed when it joined the United Nations as 

they pertain to Cyprus—conditions that mandate each Member State’s respect for the sovereignty of all States—who is to say that it will 

not violate its obligation to any other nation, 

including the United States? For Turkey to 

threaten the Republic of Cyprus—a nation that 

has been a staunch supporter of the United 

States and one that has been an unwavering 

ally in the Global War on Terror—is disturbing. 

The United States cannot simply remain silent 

and watch these provocative acts take place. 

Madam Speaker, enough is enough. I encourage my colleagues to join me in condemning Turkey’s blatant and repeated acts of 

aggression against the Republic of Cyprus 

and to demand that Turkey abide by the provisions to which it agreed when it joined the 

United Nations, provisions that the Republic of 

Cyprus has continually observed with pride. 

f 

RECOGNIZING THE HONORABLE 

JOE KNOLLENBERG ON THE OCCASION OF HIS RETIREMENT 

FROM THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

HON. JO BONNER OF ALABAMA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, December 10, 2008 

Mr. BONNER. Madam Speaker, I rise today 

to honor the distinguished career of the Honorable JOE KNOLLENBERG for his service to the 

people of Michigan and the United States 

House of Representatives. Congressman 

KNOLLENBERG has represented the Ninth Congressional District of the State of Michigan for 

the past 16 years. 

Born and raised in Mattoon, Illinois, JOE is 

a graduate of East Illinois University. After 

serving in the Army for 2 years, he moved to 

the Detroit area in 1959 to work as an Allstate 

Insurance agent and eventually opened his 

own branch office. 

JOE quickly became a familiar face in his 

community serving as PTA president, homeowner association president and parish leader. 

He also chaired the Oakland County GOP organization and directed the campaign of Republican Representative William S. Broomfield 

in 1992. 

Elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1992, JOE has served as chairman of 

three House Appropriations subcommittees 

during his tenure. He currently serves as the 

ranking member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation and Housing and 

Urban Development. 

An ardent supporter of auto manufacturers, 

an integral part of Michigan’s economy, JOE

authored legislation that cracked down on 

counterfeiters who make fraudulent automotive 

parts that cost Americans thousands of jobs in 

the automotive industry. 

Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join 

me in recognizing a dedicated leader and 

friend to many in this body. I know his family, 

his wife of 45 years, Sandie; his two sons, 

Marty and Steve; and his many friends and 

colleagues join me in honoring his accomplishments and extending thanks for his service 

over the years on behalf of the State of Michigan and the United States of America. 

JOE will surely enjoy the well deserved time 

he now has to spend with his family and loved 

ones. I wish him the best of luck in all his future endeavors. 

f 

INTRODUCTION OF H.R. 7330 THE 

‘‘COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYOFF 

ACT OF 2008’’ 

HON. JOE BARTON OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, December 10, 2008 

Mr. BARTON of Texas. Madam Speaker, 

the Energy and Commerce Committee is vested with the responsibility for overseeing 

sports, and that includes the current process 

for determining a national college football 

champion: the BCS system. College football is 

more than an exhilarating sport, it’s a billiondollar business. I’m introducing legislation 

today because despite every effort to fix the 

problems of BCS, college seasons still end in 

sniping and controversy, rather than clear winners and losers determined on the field. 

The BCS system was created to identify a 

broadly accepted national champion, but 50 

percent of the time it has failed to do so. Most 

coaches who lose half their games would also 

lose their jobs. Yet that’s what we settle for in 

determining a champion today. 

The BCS system of determining America’s 

top collegiate team was established in 1998 

and has been plagued by controversy almost 

ever since. In some years the sport’s national 

championship winner was left unsettled, and 

at least one school was left out of the many 

millions of dollars in revenue that accompany 

the title. Despite repeated efforts to improve 

the system, the controversy rages on. 

In the 2003 season, the University of Oklahoma and Louisiana State University were selected to play in the title game, even though 

the University of Southern California arguably 

had an equal claim. LSU beat Oklahoma and 

USC also won its bowl game, leaving both 

schools claiming to be national champions and 

further chafing millions of college football fans, 

especially USC alumni. As a direct result of 

LSU’s selection by BCS, the school’s merchandise sales in both 2003 and 2004 were 

more than double previous levels, producing 

millions of dollars in additional revenue for the 

school. 

In the 2004 season, again three equally 

qualified and, in this case, undefeated 

teams—Auburn, Oklahoma and USC—fought 

for the two slots in the title game, which once 

again produced an uneven outcome as USC 

defeated Oklahoma handily. Auburn won its 

game, but had no opportunity to play for a national championship and the millions of dollars 

that accompany it. 

This year, we again have two teams with 

one loss each playing for the ‘‘championship’’ 

while two undefeated teams and four additional teams with only one loss will play in 

bowl games, but none can become ‘‘champion.’’ 

The distinction of being the best brings millions of dollars in revenue, but the BCS method of determining who is number one consistently misfires. When we held our first hearing 

on BCS in 2005, I didn’t have legislation in 

mind, and I hoped none would be necessary. 

Simply exposing the flaws and subjecting 

them to discussion, however, hasn’t led to improvement by those who run the system. 

The legislation I am introducing along with 

Congressmen BOBBY RUSH and MICHAEL

MCCAUL recognizes the flaws of this system. 

Consumers, whether the millions who watch 

the game on TV or the lucky few who pay for 

a ticket to the computer-designated ‘‘championship’’ game, are being deceived. The BCS 

championship game is not a championship 

game under any sensible interpretation of the 

manner in which sports champions are determined. 

The legislation we are introducing today will 

prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a post-season game as a ‘‘national 

championship’’ football game, unless it is the 

result of a playoff system. Violations of the 

prohibition will be treated as violations of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act as an unfair or 

deceptive act or practice, and provides the 

FTC with civil penalty authority. 

The legislation does not specify the details 

of the playoff system; rather, it ensures that 

that all Division I, Football Bowl Subdivision, 

teams should be initially eligible at the start of 

every season. The existing bowl structure 

could easily be incorporated into or as the 

basis for such a playoff system. 

We’re never going to abolish all controversy, 

and who’d really want to be rid of it, anyway? 

People will argue about who should be in and 

out of playoffs, too, but I am confident when 

more of the most deserving teams can compete, a true national champion is much likelier 

to emerge.