To extend through December 31, 2006, the authority of the Secretary of the Army to accept and expend funds contributed by non-Federal public entities to expedite the processing of permits.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 11 minutes.

(Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to begin consideration of H.R. 5672, making appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for Science, the Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, and related agencies. This bill provides a funding for programs whose impact ranges from the safety of people in their homes and communities to the conduct of diplomacy around the world and to the farthest reaches of space exploration.

The bill before the House today reflects the delicate balancing of needs and requirements. We have drafted what I consider a responsible bill for fiscal year 2007 spending levels for the Departments and agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction. We have carefully prioritized the funding in the bill and made hard choices about how to spend the scarce resources.

We have been very fair. We, the entire Committee, have been very fair with each and every Member that has approached the subcommittee as we went through this entire process.

I want to thank Chairman Lewis for supporting us with what I believe is a fair allocation and helping us to move the bill forward. I also want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Mollohan, who has been a very effective and valued partner and colleague on the bill. I appreciate his principled commitment and understanding of the programs in the bill.

I also want to thank members of the subcommittee for their help and assistance: Charles Taylor, Mark Kirk, Dave Weldon, Tom DeLay, Virgil Goode, John Culberson, Rodney Alexander, Jose Serrano, Bud Cramer, Patrick Kennedy, Chaka Fattah, and also Mr. Obey, the ranking member of the full committee.

I truly appreciate the professionalism and cooperation of the minority staff. In particular, I want to thank David Pomerantz, Michelle Burkett, Sally Moorhead, Julie Aaronson and Rob Nabors from the Democratic staff, who have been an enormous help during all the long hours spent putting this bill together.

I also, Mr. Chairman, want to thank the members of the subcommittee staff on both sides for their long hours to produce the fiscal year 2007 Science, State, Justice, Commerce bill. I would like to particularly thank Mike Ringler, the clerk of the subcommittee, who has done an outstanding job and really spent hours and hours away from his family, as have the others, and who has led the subcommittee through the House appropriations process.

I also want to thank publicly and personally Christine Kojac, John Martens, Anne Marie Goldsmith, Clelia Alvarado, and Darryl Hill for their tireless efforts. Their work is very much appreciated. Only a handful of us know how much time and effort they have put in, but I want to thank them. And the record ought to show, frankly, when history looks back, who gets credit for a lot of what has taken place.

In my personal office, I would like to thank Dan Scandling, Janet Shaffron, J.T. Griffin, Samantha Stockman, and Courtney Schlieter for their efforts in working with the subcommittee; and from the minority, if I left out anybody, I mentioned, I think, Dave Pomerantz, Michelle Burkett, and Julie Aaronson, but also Rob Nabors for their efforts with regard to this.

We have worked in a bipartisan manner. And that is just not rhetoric for the Congressional Record, but it has truly been a bipartisan effort in putting the bill together. And as a former staff member up here on Capitol Hill, I personally want to thank each and every one of them. They have really done an outstanding job.

The bill contains $59.8 billion in discretionary spending. At a time of fiscal constraint, we have developed a bill that preserves critical domestic and international programs while living within our allocations. We have had to make some difficult choices and focus limited resources on programs that are most critical to the Nation. Program increases are focused on the most critical areas, including science and competitiveness, counterterrorism, and law enforcement.

For the Department of Justice, the bill includes $22.1 billion, $1 billion above the request. The bill includes a total of $2.57 billion for proven State and local law enforcement crime-fighting programs to keep our communities safe.

We have restored, and I stress the word ``restored,'' $1.1 billion above the request to the highest priority programs, including SCAAP, justice assistance grants, and juvenile justice programs, all which the Administration proposed to eliminate or dramatically reduce. That is $1.1 billion with a ``B.''

The bill also includes important new investments to fight the national epidemic of methamphetamine abuse; $367 million for justice assistance grants to support local drug task forces, a $50 million increase; $99 million in grants to combat meth, a $36 million increase; and $40 million for drug courts, a $30 million increase, which is a 300 percent increase in drug courts; and a $15 million increase for DEA to support State

and local efforts to fight international trafficking.

Gangs pose one of the greatest threats to the safety and security of all Americans. Today, gangs are more violent, more organized, and more widespread than ever before. This bill focuses funding on fighting gangs and gang violence. We have increased the FBI and the ATF antigang programs, and restored funding to the gang resistance training program. In addition, we have supported a $40 million gang program following the Project Safe Neighborhoods model that would allow each U.S. Attorney's Office to finance antigang strategies in cooperation with State and local law enforcement.

The bill also includes $6.04 billion for the FBI to include counterterrorism and counterintelligence capabilities, while continuing to fight crimes such as child exploitation, human trafficking, and gang violence. Again, programs we have increased far over the administration level.

I would also like to highlight that the bill continues funding for the eight faith-based rehabilitation programs in the Federal prison system and recognizes the success that faith-based programs have had in reducing recidivism. Before I got elected to Congress I was involved in a prison program. You must give these men and women hope and an opportunity. So, I think this is a very important program at all the State, local, and Federal levels.

Statistically, two out of every three inmates are likely to re-offend and end up back in prison, often with only days or months in their release. Therefore, it is critical we promote programs that help break this cycle, thereby improving the safety and the security of our communities. In light of the success the values-based programs have had in this regard, I encourage the Bureau of Prisons and state departments of correction to continue alternative treatment programming that emphasizes the teaching of positive social values and reform character.

It is immoral just to warehouse people and not give them any rehabilitation, faith-based programs, mental health or other programs. I have long been a supporter of these value-based types of programs and think they should be continued in Federal and State prisons. I hope that Congress will work to protect these programs.

If you take these programs away, faith-based, mental health, what type of society will we have?

In Science, the other focus in the bill this year is science and competitiveness. The capacity to innovate is the primary engine of our economy and our way of life. In order to sustain it, we must increase our investment in basic scientific research and strengthen science education.

For this reason, the bill fully funds the President's American Competitiveness Initiative, which includes a recommitment to doubling the funding for basic science research over 10 years.

We have dramatically increased the NSF and NIST.

For NASA, the bill includes $16.7 billion.

I want to thank NASA and NIST chairman Sherwood Boehlert and Vern Ehlers, who really played a major role in this, and Mr. Mollohan.

In NASA, the bill restores $100 million of the cut proposed to the aeronautic research and responds to the lower than anticipated increases for space science programs.

The space shuttle is set to launch on Saturday, and the bill before you includes full funding for the shuttle program to support the completion of the International Space Station and continuation of the shuttle safety improvements.

In Commerce, we have dealt with critical functions of the National Weather Service and NOAA's weather and climate forecasting.

We have also included a 5.2 percent increase for the PTO and an increase of $72 million. For the State Department, and the broadcasting Board of governors, a recommendation of $9.66 billion within this Federal, $1.7 billion to provide full funding request for worldwide security and improvements.

We have included the requested funds for international peacekeeping to pay the assessed costs for missions in Sudan, Haiti and elsewhere. We have included language to require notification to the Committee that prevention and prosecution measures are taken to ensure zero tolerance in sexual abuse in peacekeeping. We also added language supporting the maintenance of a flat U.N. budget.

On the Small Business Administration, we have provided $90 million for small business development grants, a $2 million increase; also allows up to $17.5 billion in general 7(a) business loans, an unprecedented level, while requiring no appropriation.

In closing, a summary of the bill provides the increase necessary to maintain strength in critical law enforcement, fight terrorism, deal with drugs.

I again want to thank the staff and thank the committee.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN06.010

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to Mr. Lewis, the chairman of the full Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I recognize Mr. Kirk, a member of the committee, for 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), chairman of the Science Committee.

(Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson), who has really done a lot of work on a very important issue with Mr. Rogers.

Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Hobson. I want to thank Mr. Hobson, Mr. Rogers and Mr. Kingston for their leadership. This should be called the Hobson-Rogers-Kingston bill to help the FBI. They have done a great service.

I support the establishment of a Housing Allowance Program within the level of funds provided for the FBI in the bill and look forward to working to protect the retirement benefits of the supervisory special agents. Mr. Hobson, Mr. Rogers and Mr. Kingston, thank you very much.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Yes, that is my understanding. The Antiterrorism Reserve is a separate portion of the Crime Victims Fund, and there is a statutory authority allowing obligations to be made on top of any limitation carried in this bill.

Frankly, the administration never sent a rescission up again with regard to this.

Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I thank my colleague from Texas. The bill includes $10.69 million specifically for victims programs authorized by the Justice for All Act, which is $1 million above the President's request, and includes $176 million for DNA grants not earmarked, which is $68 million above the current level. As we work with the Senate in conference, we will work to ensure the highest level possible for all the programs authorized by the Justice for All Act.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Rhode Island, a member of our subcommittee, for raising this very, very important issue.

As you mentioned, dealing with the issues of substance abuse and prisoners is a critical component of ensuring that they do not repeat their crimes. Reducing recidivism of prisoners is a goal that those of us on both sides of the aisle can support.

I appreciate the gentleman's commitment. We will see what we can do with regard to coordination. The gentleman has been very faithful in raising this over and over. We will try to help in every way possible.

Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gentleman. Just look at the weather we have been having here in the Washington, D.C., area the last several days.

I would like to thank the gentleman from North Carolina for his leadership on the issue. We look forward to working with him on the issue as the bill moves forward.

The gentleman from California is correct.

The committee is aware of the circumstances surrounding the Mendota facility and will work with the gentleman from California.

I thank the gentleman from Texas, who is very, very, very persistent. I agree with his description of the intent of the language and acknowledge that the report should reflect what was passed by the committee last week as described by gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin for her very, very hard work and leadership on this issue.

The committee shares her concern of providing sources of capital for small businesses and makes a very compelling point. The committee supports this small business investment company, SBIC, program, another SBA program that provides equity investments to small businesses. The committee also understands that the NMVC program is still operational and that the SBA is still monitoring the work of the existing NMVC companies.

Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman would yield, the committee notes your concern; and we will do everything we can to help.

Mr. Chairman, I most certainly will work with the gentlewoman from Ohio on this project. This is very, very important.

You had lobbyists downtown lobbying for the Khartoum government on the issue of Darfur, where this House has voted, saying that what is taking place in Darfur is genocide, and yet you actually had a high- level official who had worked at the State Department and National Security Council out there representing the Khartoum government.

You also have a number of law firms in this city that are now representing China, and I do not know how you live with yourself if you represent China and you are an American citizen. We had a meeting yesterday and we found out there are now 40 Catholic bishops and priests in jail in China today, 40. There are 4 to 6,000 evangelical house church people in jail today in China, and yet some of the big law firms downtown are representing China.

And then the beat goes on. You have them representing China with regard to what is taking place in the Uighurs, what is taking place with the Dalai Lama and in Tibet.

So I think the gentlewoman's amendment and position is exactly right. We will do everything we can to make sure that it is on line so we can find out who has the audacity to represent Sudan and the Khartoum government during the days of genocide and the same thing with regard to China.

So we will look forward to working with the gentlewoman.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Washington for raising this issue. He has talked to me so many times, and I appreciate his persistence.

I want to thank him for his leadership on issues important to law enforcement and the fight against meth and the spread of gangs in our communities. I understand your perspective on this concern as a former law enforcement officer, and I am glad I was able to work with you to provide increased funding under the COPS program; and, frankly, if we could do more when we get to conference, we will be glad to do that.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Mr. Chairman, I first want to compliment Chairman Wolf on his efforts with regard to this bill. He has had a really tough job balancing the subcommittee's portfolio, which is considerable, with diverse important programs. He has managed in a very tough budgetary climate. I truly admire his passion, and his conviction, which are all evident in this bill.

Chairman Wolf characteristically does an excellent job, and certainly his experience working for a number of years on this bill has served him well in a very difficult situation. He is to be complimented here today.

There are very definitely some great things, Mr. Chairman, that can be said about this bill. Federal law enforcement is fully funded. Many of those accounts, such as the U.S. Attorney's account, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Prisons, are all funded above the President's requested level. Some are funded at the requested level, such as the U.S. Marshal's service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

This funding is a priority. It is important, and I support the Chairman's efforts to provide it.

The bill also fully funds the American Competitiveness Initiative, which in this bill will double over 10 years the research and development lines for physical science and engineering at NIST and the National Science Foundation.

Two significant funding improvements were made during full committee. The chairman accepted an amendment to increase funding for the Survey of Income and Program Participation by $10 million and accepted an amendment providing partial funding for the SBA Microloan program. These are two programs that many Members expressed concern about, and I am pleased the amendments were adopted after being accepted by the chairman.

Mr. Chairman, a number, around 80 to 90 at last count, of well- meaning Members will offer amendments today. We ought to be offering amendments to increase law enforcement funding. We ought to be offering amendments to restore science funding at NASA and to help NASA with the expensive and numerous tasks on its plate. We ought to be offering amendments to increase funding for the Economic Development Administration.

The list of programs needing more funding in this bill goes on and on. But the funding just isn't there. The offsets just aren't there. These well-intentioned amendments will come at the cost of important programs when they are offered up as offsets, important programs such as the census, U.N. peacekeeping efforts, salaries and expenses at the Department of State, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Commerce, which have already been cut back.

I just want to take a moment, Mr. Chairman, to remind Members about why many of these amendments will need to be opposed. It is because the insufficient budget resolution that was passed on this floor has resulted in a narrow allocation for this bill that will not allow us to fund all of the priorities that Members will advocate for on the floor.

As a matter of fact, the number of amendments that are being offered today is the greatest number that I can ever remember being offered on this bill. But they have been increasing every year as that budget allocation has become smaller and smaller because of the budget resolutions that we passed at the beginning of this process.

The number of amendments offered here today is in and of itself, I think, one of the best indicators that we are not providing enough money for domestic discretionary programs. Members are recognizing that program by program by program. Members are offering amendments, trying to increase funding for those programs, those worthy programs that I just mentioned.

It is beginning to really hurt. It is beginning to really hurt law enforcement, beginning to really hurt NASA and other science programs. It is beginning to really hurt economic development programs.

For example, I know the chairman is committed to providing adequate funding for our Nation's law enforcement, the men and women who put their lives on the line every day in the name of public safety back in our communities. The President's budget cut $1.3 billion out of State and local law enforcement, about half of the funding provided in fiscal year 2006.

Now, let me repeat that. The request that the President of the United States sent to the United States Congress cut $1.3 billion out of State and local law enforcement, about half the funding that we provided last year. These funds are important resources to the men and women who are keeping our districts safe, our communities safe.

Chairman Wolf restored $1.1 billion of this funding, for a total of $2.3 billion for Federal assistance to State and local law enforcement. That is what is in this bill, $2.3 billion for Federal assistance to State and local law enforcement.

Last year, Mr. Chairman, the Congress provided $2.5 billion for State and local law enforcement. That was $1 billion above the President's request then, but $300 million below the 2005 level. The 2005 level that we passed here was $1.2 billion above the request, but $200 million below the 2004 level. The 2004 level was $500 million below the 2003 level, and the 2003 level was $500 million below the 2002 level. The 2002 level was $400 million below the high water mark for Federal assistance to State and local law enforcement of $4.4 billion in 2001.

While we see what is happening here, the bottom line is that we have cut about $2 billion in funding for State and local law enforcement since 2001. Well, do we care about that? Does that have an effect? Well these cuts, Mr. Chairman, are not without consequences.

Preliminary data from the FBI's uniform crime report for 2005 indicate that violent crime rates have increased 2.5 percent from 2004 to 2005. This is the largest increase since 1992. Is anyone surprised? Certainly not.

Violent crime rates fell steadily from 1993 to 2002, and this nearly coincides with the establishment of the community policing program known as the COPS program under the Clinton administration. The Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, COPS, was created in 1994; 100,000 police officers were put on the beat by funds provided under the COPS program.

Consider these facts. COPS funded its 100,000th community policing professional in May of 1999, and violent crime rates continued to fall. Congress funded State and local assistance programs at $4.4 billion, their highest level in 2001. Violent crime rates dropped between 2001 and 2002. Congress decreased State and local law enforcement funding in 2002 by $400 million, as I mentioned before, and violent crime rates increased in 2003 and rose again in 2004 and rose again dramatically in 2005, coinciding with the lack of assistance coming from the Federal Government to help our State and local law enforcement.

Well, Mr. Chairman, there is a correlation between the funding we provide here in this committee for State and local law enforcement and incidents of violent crime. There is a relationship.

With respect to this bill, Mr. Chairman, the President's fiscal 2007 budget, for the second year in a row, contained a .02 cents per pound tax on the users of explosives. My State, due to its extraction industry, would bear the largest share of the burden with this tax. The repeated proposal of this tax by the President, coupled with the inadequate allocation provided our subcommittee, has resulted in an insufficient budget resolution; and this placed the chairman, Chairman Wolf, in a very difficult position. So he used part of that tax, understanding that in the process this would be challenged, and at the appropriate point, Mr. Chairman, during consideration of this bill, I intend to make a point of order against this tax. We appreciate the Rules Committee not protecting this provision.

Well, anyone on this subcommittee knows of the chairman's passion for helping the weakest and most vulnerable in our society. To that end, Chairman Wolf restored $367 million to the Justice Assistance Formula Grant Program funds that helps our youngest and our most troubled citizens. These funds were zeroed out by the President, and I applaud Chairman Wolf for restoring them.

Further, in continuance of his commitment to assisting law enforcement with the ever-increasing gang epidemic in this country, Chairman Wolf has restored $25 million cut from the President's budget from the anti-gang initiative in the COPS program.

In the Department of Commerce, the funding provided for the American Competitiveness Initiative came at a price. One of the programs that couldn't be fully restored is the Manufacturing Extension Partnership. This program is very important to basic industry areas across this country. Mr. Chairman, the President slashed the funding for this program but the chairman doubled it, bringing it to $92 million, about $17 million below last year's enacted program.

Another program that suffers is the Advanced Technology Program, which was eliminated by the President. We are able to fully fund the decennial census and the American Community Survey. I well remember the problems that arose during the last census and the fight for emergency funding for census on the floor, and full funding this year keeps us on track for the future.

In NASA, the President's budget request again made dramatic reductions to science and aeronautics funding, as NASA tries to fit in these programs and the return to flight, the International Space Station and the Moon-Mars proposal at the same time it fails to deliver on promised funding. The chairman again is forward-looking in his restoration of $75 million to the science programs and $100 million to aeronautics, which is a huge contributor to the American economy. Despite these increases, however, funding levels will still generate cause for alarm from our science community.

The bottom line is, for all of these programs and numerous others that I have not mentioned, $59.8 billion is simply not enough. The chairman has been extremely responsive to Members and to the needs of the people who benefit from these programs, restoring and increasing where he was able to do so in this tight allocation. But, despite these noble efforts, we have seen for the past several years and will see again this year programs being whittled away through attrition by the administration that is reducing necessary discretionary spending in the name of balancing a budget which, in truth, these actions would demonstrate the administration has no intention of balancing.

One could easily make the argument that this bill needs several billion dollar in additional funding, increased funding for the Economic Development Administration, for the Small Business Administration Microloans, for Legal Services Corporation, for funding above the restoration that the Chairman provided for State and local justice programs, funding for OSHA and for fisheries programs in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a program supported by so many Members here. More funding is needed for life sciences funding at NASA and biology funding at the National Science Foundation and the perceived need to accelerate the Crew Exploration Vehicle at NASA to maintain the United States' access to space after shuttle retirement. These all add up quickly.

Each of these is a need for which I have heard support, either from constituents or from the community at large or from other Members.

And each of these needs has meritorious arguments for funding. I would hope all Members would view favorably any opportunity to seek an increased allocation to support these critical programs.

I would like to again note how fortunate we are to have had such a principled chairman for the past 6 years. It has been an honor to work with you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to working with you again next year, regardless of whether you remain on this subcommittee or move to another one.

And, Mr. Chairman, I would like to note that every member of the minority on this subcommittee has equally high regard for the chairman, as he has worked with more than one of us as his ranking member.

I also would like to thank the majority staff, Mike Ringler, Christine Kojac, John Martens, Anne Marie Goldsmith, Clelia Alvarado and Darryl Hill, as well as J.T. Griffin from the chairman's personal staff, for the fair and open way in which they have worked with the minority in crafting this bill. Our input and the chairman's output was accepted at every turn.

I also want to thank the minority appropriations staff, David Pomerantz, Michelle Burkett, and Chris Martin for their tireless efforts. And I want to thank Sally Moorhead and Julie Aaronson, of my personal staff, for their valuable work on this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member, Mr. Obey.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), who served as the ranking member on this subcommittee in the last several years.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy with the chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to first commend the chairman and the ranking member for the good work that they have done on this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, there is a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility that has been authorized and appropriated in a small farming community in my district, in Mendota, California. In May, 2000, the Bureau of Prisons proposed to build a medium security correctional institute in the U.S. Western Region and selected Mendota as the site. This facility, when completed, would house 1,152 beds that are needed in a system that is already over 37 percent over capacity.

In fiscal 2001 and fiscal 2002, $158.9 million was appropriated for the site planning, development, construction of the Mendota facility. However, rescissions of $57 million in fiscal year 2002 and 2004 have jeopardized this project. To maintain the existing contract, the final option must be exercised by this year, October 8, 2006.

Should this contract expire, a new bid is expected to increase the cost of the facility by over 20 percent more. Over $100 million in Federal funds has already been spent on the facility. It now sits empty, and 40 percent of the construction is completed.

If this rescission is allowed to stand, it will stand as a testament to the Federal Government's response of being penny wise and pound foolish.

Mr. Chairman, is it your understanding that the $89 million included in this bill for construction and maintenance of Federal prisons is not directed to specific facilities?

Then, Mr. Chairman, if the Bureau of Prisons deems this project a priority, would the chairman agree to work with me to try to make funds available to continue this facility so that it is not left half completed and therefore wasted Federal funds would have been spent?

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would like to thank the gentleman from Virginia for his comments.

With the permission of the Chair, I will now submit for the Record an additional statement detailing the situation at this Mendota facility and commit to continue to work with you.

Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Mollohan, I commend you for your leadership and good work on the Science State Justice Commerce Appropriations measure, given the limitations of the budget. I was particularly pleased with the report language addressing the Administration's shortsighted request to rescind prison construction funds bearing in mind the increasing demands on our already overcrowded federal prisons.

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my constituents in the small rural town of Mendota, I would like to call your attention to an issue of pressing concern in the congressional district I am proud to represent. At its core this is an issue of smart budgeting, addressing security demands, and the federal government following through on its commitments.

In May of 2000, the City of Mendota was approached by the Federal Bureau of Prisons proposing to build a medium security federal correctional institution in Mendota, California. The required environmental impact study followed, after which Mendota was selected. The local elected officials and community leaders have been strong supporters of the project, proud to provide a public service to the country and encouraged by the economic stimulus the prison would create.

The demand for such a prison is imperative and the Mendota facility will provide much needed bed space for 1,152 medium-security male inmates. With crowding at medium-security facilities currently 37 percent over capacity, this institution is of critical importance. Worse yet, an additional 7,500 new federal inmates are expected to enter our federal prisons annually.

Today, California's Corrections Institutions are the second-largest prison system in the nation after the Federal Bureau of Prisons. California's prison population, according to a June 11, 2006, report in the Washington Post, ``has surged in recent months to more than 173,000, resulting in the worst overcrowding in the country and costing taxpayers more than $8 billion a year.'' Just today, The Sacramento Bee reported that California ``prisons are more overcrowded than ever, some 200 percent of design capacity.'' In response, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger called for a special legislative session and proposed an initiative to expedite the construction of State prisons.

The funding history for the Mendota facility is an embarrassment. Should the Administration get its way in the FY2007 budget, it is the American taxpayer that will bear the burden of increased costs. Funding for this facility includes $11.9 million in FY2001 for site and planning development and $147 million in FY 2002 for remaining construction funding. However, rescission of $5.744 million in FY 2002 and $51.895 million in FY 2004 has jeopardized the entire project. To maintain the existing contract, the final option must be exercised by October 8, 2006. Should this contract expire, it is anticipated that any new contract will cost at least 20 percent more.

However, the President's FY2007 Budget contained no funding for the completion of the Mendota facility.

The federal government has made a long term commitment to construct and operate the Mendota facility. Over $100 million in federal funds has already been spent on the facility with 40 percent of the construction complete. To bring this project to a virtual halt at this stage would be unfair to the citizens of Mendota, a city with an 18.6 percent unemployment rate and 42 percent living below the poverty line. Mendota is counting on the government to keep its promise.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill, and before I go any further, I want to join the well-deserved chorus of folks who have praised the chairman, Mr. Wolf. For 4 years I was his ranking member, and I have never met a gentleman who can be, in the middle of differences on issues, so fair and so humane. And Chairman Wolf knows that on many issues we didn't disagree and still don't disagree. But the way in which he handled them, the way in which he treated me, and the way in which he treated the minority party really says a lot about who you are. And if we took a poll over here, you would find out that we wish we could change the rules to make sure you remain in your position, as ranking member next year, but certainly in your position. And that is the kind of person that you are.

It is also a great pleasure for me to work with our ranking member, Mr. Mollohan. And the respect that we have for each other has really made our working together a good experience. And I thank you for that.

This bill is such a huge bill that a lot of times when we stand on the floor and we speak about it we will say that there are 25 good things in it, then we will say there are 10 things that need fixing or vice versa, and people will say, well, they are being negative about a bill. But the public and a lot of Members just do not realize how many agencies are covered by this bill; and, in spite of what at times is a very difficult allocation, Chairman Wolf, with the assistance of Ranking Member Mollohan, has been able to do wonders within this bill.

Just to give you some of the things that I pay attention to: A large increase in funding for the National Science Foundation as part of the American Competitive Initiative. Funding levels on which we can build for NOAA as we move through conference and full funding for the National Weather Service. Full funding for the crucial work that the Census Bureau must do in preparation for its next census, which we all know is mandated by the Constitution.

And if I may add to the comments that the ranking member made before,

there will be many amendments tonight, and I take this opportunity to say that some of those amendments will have offsets, I think, hurting the Census Bureau and hurting the Bureau's ability to conduct the next census. So I hope when Members put forth amendments, they will realize where the offset is coming from. It is not just this particular one but other agencies that would be hurt by the offsets. We all want to put money in certain areas. I surely will speak about that tonight. But we have to be careful where those dollars come from.

Forty million dollars in funding for the Drug Courts, which is at the fiscal year 2005 level. The full amount requested on the Diplomatic and Consular Programs for worldwide security upgrades and for security projects under the Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance account.

Now, within the Department of Justice account, I continue to be concerned about the dwindling level of support we are providing to our State and local governments. And here is where the issue is and it is such a difficult issue. We, since September 11, and I come from New York City and I understand this issue well, have focused a lot of attention, and rightfully so, on the war on terrorism. But if you get the FBI and speak to them, they will even admit that they have had to focus a lot of their attention from other issues that they used to go after, other crimes, to focus on the war on terror.

So when you represent a district like I do in the South Bronx, you wonder just how long we can go without paying full attention to the war on drugs, to the war on crime, to the war on blue collar crime, to the war on crime in our streets. That is why recently, as we know, the FBI admitted that violent crime had spiked for the first time last year since 2001, and I believe it is a direct consequence of the war on terror. So one of our challenges for the future is to see how we can deal with and strike that balance.

Although the full amount requested was provided for international peacekeeping activities, I worry that there will not be sufficient funding for what we all know will be additional peacekeeping needs as we move forward in the fiscal year. I also regret the inability to fully fund our membership obligations to international organizations.

And, lastly, I have joined our committee ranking member, Mr. Obey, in saying that the Legal Services Corporation is a program that needs to get the full funding that it deserves. We have come a long way when you realize that I am standing here defending a program that was created by Richard Nixon but which affects a community like ours to a great extent, the ability to have people who ordinarily cannot afford a lawyer be represented in the court.

As I said before, the bill strikes a balance. We wish, as we all know, that we had more funding. But in spite of the shortcomings, the bill that was put together by the committee and under the leadership of Mr. Wolf is a good bill and one that I will support and vote for.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I support the passage of H.R. 6316. This bill extends through December 31, 2008, the authority of the Secretary of the Army to accept and expend funds contributed by non-Federal public entities to process permits under the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbor Act of 1899.

The current authority for this program expires on December 31 of this year. The program is popular and well-received, particularly in the northwest part of the country.

I congratulate my committee colleague Mr. Baird for his attention to this issue and for securing today's consideration of this bill. I can think of no other Member who has served his local or regional issues with more enthusiasm and effectiveness.

The language in H.R. 6316 is similar to the two previous extensions of this program which passed the House September 20, 2005, and March 14, 2006. Both of these votes to extend the program received strong support from the House.

The language in this legislation is modeled after the language contained in H.R. 2864, the Water Resources Development Act of 2005, which passed this House on July 14, 2005, by an overwhelming vote of 406-14.

While my preference would be to address the extension of this program through passage of the broader Water Resources Development Act, at this later hour in the session it seems increasingly unlikely that work can be completed on the larger bill.

This really is unfortunate because it only further delays the opportunity for the Corps of Engineers to provide essential flood control, navigation and ecosystem restoration projects to our Nation and vital public safety and economic benefits to our constituents.

We are now just one week shy of 6 years since the last water resources bill was enacted, and this is really far too long.

I am certain that there will be questions as to why Congress was unable to enact a water resources bill in the 109th Congress, especially since this is the first time since 2000 that both the House and Senate Chambers were able to approve legislation for the other body to consider.

However, in spite of this significant achievement and roughly 5 months of staff negotiations towards a conference agreement, the fact remains that no agreement has been reached, and we are days away from the adjournment and facing one more year without a water resources bill.

Mr. Speaker, the current administration has no commitment to the Nation's premier water-related infrastructure agencies. This administration fails to understand the importance of the Corps of Engineers and the vital work that this agency does for the American people.

The administration's lack of support for a comprehensive Water Resources Development Act has only made Congress's work more difficult.

During the consideration in both the House and Senate, the administration released two statements of administration policy that were highly critical of the Congress's efforts, especially of the administration's concern with the overall cost of two bills. However, what the administration fails to recognize is that the roughly $10 billion project authorizations contained in this House-passed version and the $12 billion in the Senate-passed version reflect 6 years of requests since the Water Resources Development Act of 2000. Should Congress fail to approve this Water Resources Development Act this year, we should expect that next year's bill will cost more than both the House and Senate versions, perhaps as much as $15 billion. However, the Department of Transportation predicted it would be $19 billion this year.

These numbers are consistent with the historical costs of past water resources bills, and further delay only results in making these vital projects more expensive over time. Yet Congress must also share the blame for its failure to deliver a comprehensive water resources bill this year. With both the House and Senate and the White House under Republican control, it would seem that passage of this legislation would have been achievable. In spite of these significant efforts of both the chairman of the conference committee and my chairman, Mr. Young, the House and Senate has been unable to reach agreement on a final package. I am confident that our committee, under the leadership of our incoming chairman, Mr. Oberstar, will make the passage and enactment of the Water Resources Development Act a number one priority in 2007.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this bill and reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird).

Madam Speaker, I have no other requests for time, and I yield the balance of the time.