Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Florida set an example for the rest of the Nation by creating a program giving parents of children with disabilities the choice they deserve. The John McKay Scholarship Program was put in place to increase parental choice by allowing the parents of children with disabilities who had been attending a public school that was not addressing their needs to decide where their child would excel the most, be it private or parochial. Currently in Florida, those scholarships are funded by the State.

In passing this amendment we would be able to reach more of the 374,000 students in Florida alone who are eligible for these scholarships. Today, over 9,000 students utilize these scholarships to receive the education they would otherwise not be afforded. Fifty percent of those students qualify for free and reduced lunch, a higher percentage of low-income students than in the general education population in Florida. Thanks to these scholarships, we are helping low income students receive services they deserve.

This amendment will allow States to participate if they wish, a chance to benefit from the program like the McKay Scholarship Program; a program, by the way, which has an 89 percent reenrollment rate by those parents who are satisfied with the choice that the McKay scholarship affords them.

Mr. Speaker, Florida has received very positive feedback from these parents and from the educational system, and the McKay scholarship continues to grow. Let us not turn our backs on these children who deserve these educational services and let us continue to help them achieve their goals.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) for yielding me time, a good friend who has made a tremendous difference in this body in a very short period of time; and my friend and colleague from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega); and our fellow author of this bill, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Boyd). Truly, conservation in the movement and the commitment to public access for hunting and other outdoor activities is a bipartisan effort and something all of us are committed to.

Mr. Speaker, on March 14, 2003, the National Wildlife Refuge System celebrated its centennial anniversary. A hundred years ago, President Theodore Roosevelt established the first refuge, the Pelican Island Bird Reservation in Florida's Indian River Lagoon. Today the National Wildlife Refuge System has evolved into the world's most unique network of lands and waters set aside specifically for conservation of fish, wildlife, and plants. With 540 refuges encompassing nearly 95 million acres and hosting some 35 million visitors annually, the National Wildlife Refuge System is a complex network of lands managed for wildlife and the public. There are refuges in every State of the Union and within an hour's drive of almost every major city.

The Secretary of the Interior, Gayle Norton, was joined by thousands of wildlife enthusiasts, Members of Congress, and notable conservationists to celebrate the centennial of the system on March 14 at Pelican Island. These celebrations occurred simultaneously at wildlife refuges across America, and the celebration will continue throughout the year.

To commemorate this event, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd) and I introduced H. Res. 173 to commemorate this centennial anniversary and to express support for its continued success in the next 100 years and beyond.

As we gather in support of this to commemorate this tremendous birthday for the system, I would like to read into the Record an advertisement from Roll Call sponsored by nearly 40 sportsmen conservation groups. This diverse group represents the backbone of America's conservation efforts, and their strong support of the refuge system is both a testament and a tribute to the vision of the sportsman conservationist President Theodore Roosevelt, who proclaimed the first refuge in 1903. The ad begins with a quote from that great President and reads as follows: ``In a civilized and cultivated country, wild animals only continue to exist at all when preserved by sportsmen. The excellent people who protest against all hunting and consider sportsmen an enemy of wildlife, are ignorant of the fact that in reality the genuine sportsman is by all odds the most important factor in keeping the larger and more valuable wild creatures from total extermination.''

The hunting community was one of the original, if not the only original, entity that recognized the need for

wildlife conservation, not only for hunters but for all those who seek to enjoy wildlife. Hunters were conservationists long before it was the politically correct thing to do. The timing of the formation of the National Refuge System illustrates this. The system was formed after the virtual eradication of the native bison, together with a dangerous reduction in a number of other species such as the prong horn, migratory water fowl and others. Hunters were the first to wake up to the reality that our wildlife resources were not unlimited.

President Roosevelt, an avid hunter and conservationist himself, recognized the need to preserve wildlife through sustainable use. Unfortunately, some who oppose these hunting efforts attempt to revise history to diminish the hunting community's contribution to wildlife conservation. Recently on the eve of the centennial of the system, some have cast a pall by waging a litigation challenge to the system. Sadly, they missed the beauty of the refuge system as a place for all to enjoy wildlife and to cooperate in that effort.

The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, identified by then President Clinton as ``the most significant conservation legislation to emerge from Congress to date,'' was a collaborative effort born of extensive negotiations between executive branch, Congress, environmental groups, and sportsmens organizations. According to the executive order that announced the 1997 law, the bill was ``proof that when there is a shared commitment to do what is right for our natural resources, partisan and idealogical differences can be set aside and compromises can be negotiated for the benefit of the common good.''

Sportsmen are the original conservationists. The stewardship of the game population that provides a bounty of food and sport is crucial in the survival of many game species. The gains achieved in scientific management of game species can be linked to the efforts of hunters to maintain the populations and quality of the game they hunt. Populations of game animals have flourished through proper game management by concerned and devoted hunters. The populations of deer and turkey alone are far greater now at the beginning of this century than they ever were at the beginning of the last.

It is in a hunter's best interest to maintain game populations so that they may continue to practice the tradition they love. Licensed game hunters are deeply involved in game management on a number of levels. They pay taxes on their arms and ammunition, stamps and permits, funds that all go to help protect and maintain the sport that they hold so dear to their hearts. The rules and codes that today's sportsmen follow serve to protect and improve the quality of game species for generations to come.

I again thank the cosponsors of this legislation on both sides of the aisle, and I appreciate the time given us by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi).

Mr. Speaker, a recent broadband technology decision by the Federal Communications Commission presents serious issues for rural America and the agricultural industry as a whole.

Perhaps no small- to mid-sized business sector has been more affected by technology than agriculture, where computer systems monitor crop production, satellites relay soil moisture information and cell phones coordinate efforts.

However, last year, when the House passed the Tauzin-Dingell bill, which would remove outmoded restrictions on local phone companies in exchange for aggressive system modernization and network build-out requirements, by adopting the business-as-usual stance, the FCC refused an opportunity to move in the direction that American agriculture and rural America has by adopting new technology, and instead attempted to require some companies to give deep discounts to their competition. Capital investment by these companies will suffer greatly in central Florida and throughout rural America.

Mr. Speaker, if local phone companies have little interest and no real incentive to invest heavily in urban and wealthy suburban areas, rural and small-town Americans will once again get the short end of the stick.

I join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, including the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) in strongly urging the FCC to reconsider their position. Rural America needs the technological progress regulatory reform could bring.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 380, which contains the same language as H.R. 735. This legislation, as has been said earlier, is critically important to our Nation's economy, especially in these uncertain times.

S. 380 is good for the American consumers because it means that we will be able to hold the line on postal rate increases for at least 2 more years. It also relieves pressure on those who rely heavily on the postal service to deliver their products, allowing them to reinvest that savings into their local communities and provide more jobs. Most importantly, by freezing rates for 2 years, the postal service and its customers are afforded great stability in their mailing and long-term planning budgets.

As has been said earlier, this involved the support of all of the postal service customers, the unions, the administration; and it involved a great deal of compromise for those folks to come on board, setting the tone for long-term structural reform of the postal service.

The bill buys everyone valuable time to develop a comprehensive long- term solution to the post office's solvency, while avoiding the temptation to micromanage post offices.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), a congressional leader on postal issues, and my chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), for his hard work bringing the bill so swiftly to the floor. The gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Tom Davis) has demonstrated his leadership in legislative capabilities as chairman of the Committee on Government Reform in a very short period of time, and I appreciate his work on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for the time.

Mr. Chairman, we have been through this budget process, and I serve on the Committee on the Budget, and we have worked through a very deliberative process where there can be legitimate disagreement over how we fund these priorities, but the bottom line is this.

This country has suffered a national emergency through September 11. We are engaged in war at this time, and we have come out of a recession that has put tremendous pressures on our revenues, but there are some in this Chamber who think that Washington should be exempt from belt- tightening when every school board, every municipality, every State in America is going through the same process. Just because we print the money does not mean that we should not have to find savings.

There are people on both sides of the aisle, Mr. Chairman, who want to work towards a responsible way to save Social Security, to save Medicare. As a young Member of this Congress, I believe we have to think beyond the next election and beyond the next budget to do those kinds of things, but if we cannot find 1 percent savings, then we will never, ever be able to tell the American people that we can take the giant leaps to reform those huge programs.

The gentleman managing the floor for the other side on this debate has labeled some of us in this Chamber as henchmen for supporting our President's crusade to liberate Iraq. He has accused the President of ordering the assassination of Saddam Hussein to cover up for the fact that we have yet to find bin Laden, although we have disrupted al Qaeda. I resent that, Mr. Speaker, and I think that he should take his tongue-in-cheek tirade back to Baghdad where some of his colleagues have trod in the past. It is unacceptable when our young men and women are at war to have those kinds of character assassinations. To label Members of this body as henchmen, to go after the character of our President who has led this Nation through so much, goes above and beyond legitimate disagreement over the priorities that this budget should have, and it is unacceptable, and it should not stand.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor an extraordinary man, a man who lived to see his wish come true. Lakeland's John McMorran, who passed away as the oldest-living American at the ripe old age of 113, got his wish to live in 3 centuries.

John McMorran, the fourth-oldest living person in the world, was born in a log cabin in Port Huron, Michigan, on June 19, 1889, the same year the Eiffel Tower was built. In 1990 he moved to Lakeland in my district to be near his family. The son of farmers, he held a variety of jobs until he retired at 84. He worked at a Detroit munitions factory earning a dollar a day during World War I. Kind, happy, hard working, well put together were just some of the words used to describe him. He is survived by a vast network of family and friends who loved him.

Madam Speaker, I believe John McMorran said it best himself. When asked what his secret was to long life, he responded by saying: ``I drink a cup of coffee before every meal and I stay away from cheap whiskey.''

God bless John and his family, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, just about every day the media glorifies and offers a platform for actors and actresses who speak out on the great issues of the day: war, environment, human rights. These social icons usually stress that they are taking these stands for our children; and rightfully so, cause we should all strive to be models for future generations.

That is why I was puzzled to learn that the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences has nominated Roman Polanski for an Oscar as best director. Mr. Speaker, he fled the United States a quarter of a century ago to escape sentencing after having pled guilty to the rape of a 13-year-old girl. In fact, if he returns to the United States to receive his Oscar, he will be apprehended by the LAPD.

The Academy, however, is in good company with their nomination. The French have also nominated Mr. Polanski and are recognizing him by bestowing their Cesar Award for his work.

Mr. Speaker, there is something fundamentally wrong with the value system present in Hollywood today when the Academy would honor a pedophile who fled the country rather than face sentencing. It is times like these when it becomes brutally apparent just how out of touch Hollywood is with mainstream American values.

Mr. Speaker, as the United Nations charges towards irrelevance, we have this latest news that Libya has been selected to become Chair of the United Nations Commission on Rights.

Libya continues to be a blatant violator of human rights and remains on our own State Department's list of state sponsors of terror. Libya's totalitarian regime under Muammar Qadhafi has been a leading state sponsor of terrorism, including on November 13 the German court which convicted a Libyan national for the bombing in 1986 of the La Belle disco in Berlin; and the court further declared that there was clear evidence of responsibility of the Libyan Government for the bombing. Additionally, Libya was responsible for the explosion of Pan American Airline Flight 103 that crashed in Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 259 passengers and crew and 11 citizens on the ground.

To add insult to injury in this latest mockery of the United Nations, Iraq is in line to chair the United Nations Conference on Disarmament later this year.

Mr. Speaker, the world needs a credible spokesman for human rights and democratic values. The ascension of Libya to chair this body and the ascension of Iraq to chair the Conference on Disarmament make a further mockery of the Commission and the entire United Nations.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 3 p.m. tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn in memory of the valiant crew members of the Space Shuttle Columbia.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the seven brave men and women of the Space Shuttle Columbia: Commander Rick Husband; Pilot William McCool; Payload Commander Michael Anderson; Specialist Kalpana Chawla; Specialist David Brown; Specialist Laurel Clark; and Specialist Ilan Ramon.

Today America and the entire world grieves with the families and victims of the Space Shuttle Columbia. While there is no way one can adequately express in words the sense of sorrow that we all feel, know that our thoughts and prayers are with you in this time of tragedy, and know their loss was part of a larger manifest destiny of human understanding, the continual exploration, the continual search for knowledge below our seas, in our heavens, around this Earth, and in planets beyond, a part of the continued tradition of American leadership in exploration, discovery, and technology.

We have lost seven brave individuals, men and women, sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, husbands and wives. We will never forget their courage, bravery, and service to our Nation. Each of these individuals was a pioneer who gave their lives in the name of science and exploration.

They epitomized the best that America and mankind have to offer, and their efforts will not be lost or forgotten. We must finish the quest that they started, and we must continue on with our manned space exploration. I believe the crew of Columbia would expect nothing less.

While America mourned your tragic loss, we will never forget your heroism. You will forever be remembered in our hearts and in our minds as heroes.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 31) congratulating the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for winning Super Bowl XXXVII.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is a great day in the State of Florida. The jubilation, the celebration is still going on in the streets of Tampa and in large cities and small towns all over the Sunshine State as we rejoice in the victory of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in the Super Bowl XXXVII, a decisive win, the second highest number of points scored in any Super Bowl.

The Buccaneers brought forth a talented offense and a legendary defense with undoubtedly several future Hall of Famers.

Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if we did not begin by recognizing the man who brought us to the top of that mountain, the youngest coach to ever coach a winning team in the Super Bowl, Jon Gruden, who built on the foundation laid by Tony Dungy and brought spirit, hope and promise to that team by repeating the same mantra: pound the rock, pound the rock, keep pounding away at the opportunities, keep pounding away at the other team's offense, seize the moments and capitalize on the other team's mistakes and weaknesses.

Those outstanding players who were there to back him up, under the visionary leadership of the owners, the Glazer family, were able to capitalize on an opportunity to bring the Tampa Bay area their first Super Bowl championship.

Mr. Speaker, the community spirit that was there, the fans who have suffered through a number of seasons of poor performances, of missed opportunities, they were well rewarded last Sunday afternoon in San Diego. Those fans who have scrimped and saved to purchase season tickets, they have endured a series of coaches, a series of top-notch draft opportunities. They have endured heart-breaking losses in the final seconds, and frankly, embarrassing losses at the beginning of the game for seasons on end. Their determination, their patience paid off; and so this victory, while it is incredibly sweet for the team, it is very altogether fitting and proper for the owners, the real victory is for the fans who have done so much and given so much to keep that team spirit alive, and the Tampa Bay area is, therefore, rewarded with this Super Bowl championship.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and senior member of the Florida delegation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Palm Beach, Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. BrownWaite).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris).

(Ms. HARRIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

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

As you can see, Mr. Speaker, there is a tremendous amount of pride from the Florida delegation in the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. We certainly are grateful to Tampa's hometown Congressman, the gentleman from downtown Tampa, Florida (Mr. Davis), for introducing this resolution. He serves with a great deal of class, just as the Buccaneers were victorious with class, and the fans have celebrated with class.

This team gives back to the community, and the community is rightfully joyful in this celebration today. All of us are so proud of the work the Glazer family and Coach Gruden has done, and so I urge adoption of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I having no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the motion to recommit because it violates section 302(c) of the Congressional Budget Act. Section 302(c) prohibits the consideration of any amendment that provides new budget authority for a fiscal year until the Committee on Appropriations has made the suballocations required by section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act.

This motion to recommit increases the amount of budget authorities provided by the measure. The suballocations published by the Committee on Appropriations on October 10, 2002, lapsed upon the adjournment of the 107th Congress and no new 302(b) suballocations have been made for the 108th Congress. Hence, I make a point of order that this motion to recommit violates section 302(c) of the Congressional Budget Act.

Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.