Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate my good friend Bill McNeal on being named the National Superintendent of the Year by the American Association of School Administrators. I have worked with Bill for many years, and no one is more deserving than he is of this award.

Since the year 2000, Bill has served with distinction as the Superintendent of Wake County Public Schools in my congressional district in North Carolina. Wake County is a diverse community and one of the fastest-growing school systems in America.

Bill has demonstrated outstanding leadership in raising student performance by reaching out to all elements of the community and bringing folks together behind a shared vision of education excellence.

Just this week, Forbes Magazine named Wake County schools the number three school system in ranking among the best 100 large school districts in America. Wake County is now a showcase for successful education reform through bold leadership.

At a time when schools across America are facing budget cuts and struggling to comply with the President's No Child Left Behind unfunded mandates, Bill McNeal's accomplishments are proof again that real leadership in education reform is taking place every day in our schools.

I call on my colleagues to join me in commending Bill McNeal for this hard-earned recognition.

Mr. Speaker, on the first vote this evening, on H.R. 507, I was unavoidably detained. I ask that the record reflect that had I been present I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the conference report on H.R. 2673. This bill would provide funds, for the fiscal year that began on October 1, for eleven of the fifteen Cabinet departments, several independent government agencies, and the District of Columbia government.

I will oppose this bill because it is a combination of missed opportunities and misplaced priorities. This bill has many shortcomings, but let me focus on three key areas: agriculture, education and homeland security.

Mr. Speaker, I grew up on a tobacco farm, and my district is one of the leading tobacco producing districts in the country. As a Member of the House Agriculture Committee, I know that our farmers are hurting. North Carolina's farm families are watching a way of life that has sustained us for generations vanish without any assistance from the federal government to transition into the future. I have been working throughout this Congress on a bipartisan basis to pass a buyout of the federal tobacco quota program to aid that transition. Having worked to achieve consensus legislation, my colleagues and I sought to attach buyout legislation to this omnibus appropriations bill, the last legislative vehicle of the First Session of the 108th Congress. But the Republican Leadership rejected this effort. As a last ditch effort, I wrote to Speaker Hastert and asked him to include Congressman Walter Jones's bill to freeze quota levels that determine how much tobacco farmers can produce. Again, we were denied.

Our tobacco farmers deserve better, and I will vote No to protest the shabby treatment they have gotten from the Republican Congressional Leadership.

As the former Superintendent of North Carolina's public schools, my life's work has been the improvement of educational opportunities for all of our children. In the U.S. House, I chair the Democratic Caucus's special Task Force on Education and Job Training. In the 107th Congress, I voted for the President's landmark No Child Left Behind (NCLB) education reform law because the Administration promised to provide the resources to make the tough new reforms work. Unfortunately, the Administration has broken that promise, and I have been forced to introduce legislation to require full funding for NCLB. This omnibus appropriations bill continues to break the promise of NCLB to our children, their parents, our teachers, taxpayers and schools. The bill shortchanges NCLB by $7.8 billion in fiscal year 2004 alone. This bill also contains misguided private school vouchers in the District of Columbia. Vouchers are bad public policy because they take taxpayer dollars to pay for private school tuition. That is just plain wrong, and I have consistently opposed vouchers throughout my service in public office.

Our children deserve better, and I will vote against this bill because of the harm it does to our schools.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, as a center for the military, agriculture, technology and transportation sectors, North Carolina plays a prominent role in the ongoing effort to secure the homeland against the threat of additional terrorist attacks. As a Member of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, I have worked throughout this Congress to bolster our nation's homeland security. Although this bill does not fund the Department of Homeland Security, two important provisions of the bill will negatively impact its operation. This legislation forces the rescission of $1.8 billion in prior year supplemental appropriations and a significant portion of those funds are in DHS. In addition, the across-the-board cut contained in this bill will have a dramatic impact on certain areas. For example, the needed increase of 570 Customs and Immigration agents for improving border protection will have to be cut by nearly two-thirds. Also, the bill cuts state and local law enforcement funds by $500 million below last year's level at a time when our state and local governments face massive budget shortfalls.

Our communities deserve better, and I will vote against this bill because of its shortsighted treatment of our homeland security.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, there are many provisions of this bill I do support. I strongly support each of the projects for North Carolina's Second Congressional District that are funded in this bill. But the Republican Leadership chose to craft this bill through an indefensible and incoherent process. The result is a bill that can be summed up as a missed opportunities and misplaced priorities.

The people of my district and this country deserve better. I will vote against final passage of this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to join me in doing so.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1. As the Representative of North Carolina's 2nd District, I know firsthand how hard our older people have to struggle to pay for their prescription medicines. Since I began my service in the people's House in 1997, I have worked to create a prescription medicine benefit for our seniors. Seniors deserve a guaranteed Medicare prescription medicine benefit, not empty promises. I have consistently supported a prescription medicine benefit plan that features low, predictable premiums and allows seniors to obtain medicine from any doctor they choose. And I want seniors to be able to get their medicine from the local pharmacy, not some huge mail order company.

I oppose H.R. 1 because it does not deliver on its promises. This bill will force 73,000 Medicare beneficiaries in North Carolina to lose their retiree health benefits entirely and leave thousands more with significantly reduced benefits. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress, this bill will force 222,800 Medicaid beneficiaries in North Carolina to pay more for the prescription medicines they need. Under this bill 99,500 fewer seniors in North Carolina will qualify for low-income protections than under the Senate bill because of the assets test and lower qualifying income levels. This provision will hit particularly hard the many farmers in North Carolina whose farm equipment and land are considered financial assets even if the farmers' income is below the poverty line. Also according to CRS, under this bill, 37,920 Medicare beneficiaries in North Carolina will pay more for Part B premiums because of income relating. And according to the CMS Actuary Tables, the premium variation under the bill's premium support program would range form $1,225 in some parts of North Carolina to $675 in other areas of the state. The bill contains a huge hole in coverage which will result in no benefit at all for seniors with prescription costs between $2,200 and $5,044.

I oppose H.R. 1 because this bill will have devastating economic consequences because the $400 billion price tag will be added directly to our massive national debt of $6.8 trillion. A few short years ago, we had achieved surpluses as far as the eye could see and were on pace to erase the national debt. But this Administration's tax policies have produced record budget deficits that will be compounded by the conference report on H.R. 1. Deficits matter for our current economy because in creased borrowing means the government has to spend more and more tax money on interest costs and will have less available for other important priorities. ``For example, even before this bill passage, this year the federal government will pay $156 billion for interest on the national debt. That is three times what the federal government will spend on education. When I asked a White House representative where the money will come from to pay for this bill, I was told that it is ``new money.'' This is not new money. These are borrowed funds that will be paid for by our grandchildren and their grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, prior to holding elected office, I spent nearly twenty years as a small businessman. There can be no doubt that I strangely support the private sector. But there are some things the private sector does well and some things the private sector does not do well. Medicare was created because the private sector by itself does not do well at the important priority of providing a strong public health system for older Americans. This bill is a $400 billion ticket back to the days when senior citizens were forced to fend for themselves in the private health care marketplace. This bill sacrifices Medicare as we know it, and will cast senior citizens to the mercy of HMOs and force them to give up their own doctors and pharmacists.

Congress should reject this flawed bill and go back to the drawing board and get it right once and for all for our seniors. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Republican Medicare Privatization bill.

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I will not object, but let me thank the leader and his staff. I want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and his staff; the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), and his staff; the subcommittee chair, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), and his staff; the ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), and his staff; and my staff for all their hard work; the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon); and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and others because this bill is an important piece of legislation.

It provides for our first responders and their families a bit of security. There is a gap in the law where currently if they die of a heart attack or stroke doing their duties, their families would not get benefits. This is a bipartisan piece of legislation. Over 283 Members of this body have signed it. Let me thank the leader. I appreciate his help and the help of others in getting this to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to vote against the conference report to H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2003.

It is a sad day in America for today Congress has passed up an historic opportunity to craft an energy policy for the 21st century. The legislation we are voting on could have been an honest, bipartisan effort to halt America's growing dependence on fossil fuels for energy. It could have been focused on new technologies, energy efficiency, renewable energy, and the research and development that could produce the breakthroughs that would power the world of tomorrow. Instead, this bill is stuck in the past. Modeled after the energy plan developed by Vice President Cheney's secret energy committee, H.R. 6 reflects the philosophy that there is no energy problem that cannot be solved with another oil well.

I have no objection with supporting some new or additional oil and gas exploration or production because, until we develop the energy alternatives of the future, we must continue to meet our oil and gas needs. However, it must be done responsibly. Sacrificing environmental protection for petroleum production is not responsible. Exposing our great natural treasures, especially the North Carolina coastline, to exploitation and possible degradation is not responsible. And placing the vast majority of economic incentives that H.R. 6 offers toward more fossil fuel production, instead of energy efficiency and research into new technologies, is not responsible.

H.R. 6 provides $23.5 billion in tax breaks over the next 10 years, the majority of that for oil and gas production. That's billions in tax breaks for energy companies paid for by our children and grandchildren. I could support some tax incentives for new sources of energy, but this Administration's economic record has already created a more than $400 billion budget deficit. I cannot support more debt for future generations to pay off. The Senate version of the energy bill offered ways to pay for these tax breaks, but the Republican leadership struck them. Why are the Republicans so opposed to fiscal responsibility?

Not all of the bill's provisions are bad. I am pleased with the provisions on ethanol. They will provide new markets for corn growers and help reduce harmful emissions. The ban on the fuel additive methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) will also help ethanol users while keeping more MTBE from seeping into the Nation's water supply. But H.R. 6 provides liability protection for MTBE manufacturers. So when somebody gets sick because their products got into the water supply, these companies cannot be held accountable. That's just plain wrong.

Like the Vice President's energy plan, this bill was developed by Republican leaders behind closed doors without concern for the needs of consumers. Republicans are demanding that this House vote on a 1000+ page bill after having less than a day to review it. How many of our constituents would sign a 1000 page contract after having barely a day to read it? None. That's why organizations like the Carolina Utility Customers Association--composed of North Carolina companies like Bayer Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline, Lorillard Tobacco, and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco--oppose H.R. 6. To quote their letter, ``While H.R. 6 contains positive aspects, the fact remains that many questions need to be asked and adequately answered before this bill is passed. It is simply unwise to hastily pass a bill without fully understanding its impact.''

Unfortunately, the Republican congressional leadership wasted an opportunity to develop a prudent energy policy. I must oppose H.R. 6.

Mr. Chairman, I will reluctantly support this Iraq Supplemental Appropriations bill conference report for our troops and their families.

I will support this bill because we must support our troops and we must continue to engage the effort in Iraq to its successful conclusion. I have the honor of representing the Army's Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base and many Guard and Reserve units in North Carolina. Many of them are serving in Iraq while their families here at home pray for their safety and speedy return. This bill increases funds to purchase body armor for our troops and to contract for the clearing of unexploded ordnance. The bill provides funding for the contracting of security guards to replace reservists currently performing these duties. The Army has indicated this provision would permit the demobilization of 7,000 to 10,000 reserve component soldiers. The bill also includes a provision to continue the increased monthly rate of hazardous duty pay and Family Separation Allowances through September 30, 2004. These provisions are very important to the military families in my district because they have a very real impact in relieving some of their financial burden. I am proud my Democratic colleagues in the House and I have successfully led the fight to secure these needed funds.

I have serious reservations about this vote because despite the brilliant and valiant action of our soldiers to defeat the evil regime of

Saddam Hussein, this administration has failed to implement an adequate plan to win the peace. This Administration has failed to level with the American people and the Congress about the true costs and duration of the ongoing war in Iraq. The American people and their Representatives in Congress deserve true and honest presentation of the facts, especially on such weighty matters of war and peace. Before the Administration comes back to Congress with another request for more funds, I want to see an honest assessment of the duration and costs of the operations in Iraq and a realistic plan for a lasting peace in that troubled region of the world.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would prefer that the House could act on amendments to address this conference report's shortcomings, but we were not given that option. Despite my reservations, I will support this bill because it is the best option we have before us to win the peace in Iraq. I will support this bill on behalf of the people of North Carolina's Second Congressional District and the men and women in our armed forces.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for leading this Special Order. It is timely and so important, and it is really about the failure of the Republican regime here in Washington on the budget, at a time when the other side in the budget debate is engaging in, I think, deception and misinformation and sometimes down right dishonest figures.

The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) is not only an expert on the Federal budget, but he is engaging as a lone voice of truth and really what the facts are and I thank him for that. The American people need to know that.

The truth of the matter is that the Republican economic record is in shambles and is leading this country in the wrong direction. This failed economic record has three main features: huge budget deficits, massive job losses, and festering domestic problems. The Bush administration and the congressional Republicans have sought to deny their budget calamity of the blown surplus and the return to huge deficits, and they are going to be there as far as the eye can see; but the Congressional Budget Office has determined that the budget would be balanced, as we have already heard, by 2006 if it were not for the administration's tax policies.

As bad as the budget situation is, as has been shared by my colleagues, the administration and the leadership in this Congress will not stop digging. The first thing to do, as our colleague from Texas said when you get in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging. Well, they are going to bring more programs out that will dig the hole deeper.

The economy has lost roughly 3.2 million private sector jobs, the worst record of any administration since Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression. My home State of North Carolina has seen devastating job losses. We are the second largest State with manufacturing job losses in the country. The national unemployment rate has gone from 4.1 percent to 6.1 percent. North Carolina Statewide unemployment is

roughly 6.6 percent, and I have counties in my congressional district where the unemployment rate is approaching 15 percent.

For all their talk about appealing to the investor class, as we have heard this evening, Republicans have presided over the loss of $4.6 trillion in stock market wealth, and a lot of that is income of retirees.

The problem is made worse by the record deficits and massive national debt that is going to make it impossible for us to make the investments that we need to make in America's long-term economic prosperity. As has been shared this evening, we need to be investing right now, for example, just in education, the administration is proposing to shortchange its Leave No Child Behind by roughly $20 billion over 3 years. I met on Monday with international business officers of this country, they know already because they are seeing the cuts, what this is going to be about is it is going to be unfunded mandates to local governments at a time when they are hurting. Critical needs at the local level are going unmet in a whole lot of areas, and problems are festering because the national debt crisis is getting worst.

Just last week, WRAL-TV, the largest television station in the Raleigh market, talked about a school in North Carolina that is bursting at the seams with overcrowding; specifically, New Hope Elementary School in Wilson, where 135 students are going to classes in closets, literally in closets. That is wrong at a time when we could be doing better if we were doing the right thing about our budget.

The Democrats had a plan to do it. We could get the economy going without massive debts. We have sponsored legislation to fund school construction, but my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will not let it happen. The administration and the Republican leadership in Congress refused to act because they have blown the budget surplus, so there is no money left.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, Democrats have a better idea to return to a balanced budget and return sanity and honesty to the Federal budget. I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for leading this Special Order.

Mr. Chairman, I will support passage of this Iraq Supplemental Appropriations bills for our troops and their families.

I will support this bill because we must support our troops and we must continue to engage the effort in Iraq to its successful conclusion. I have the honor of representing the Army's Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base and many Guard and Reserve units in North Carolina. Many of them are serving in Iraq while their families here at home pray for their safety and speedy return. This bill increases funds to purchase body armor for our troops and to contract for the clearing of unexploded ordnance. The bill provides funding for the contracting of security guards to replace reservists currently performing these duties. The Army has indicated this provision would permit the demobilization of 7,000 to 10,000 reserve component soldiers. The bill also includes a provision to continue the increased monthly rate of hazardous duty pay and Family Separation Allowances through September 30, 2004. These provisions are very important to the military families in my district because they have a very real impact in relieving some of their financial burden. I am proud my Democratic colleagues in the House and I have successfully led the fight to secure these needed funds.

I will support this bill because America must heed history's lessons from the previous century. After the Allied victory in the First World War, war-weary America turned its back on the European countries that had been ravaged by the war. Postwar Europe's chaotic power vacuum gave rise to Benito Mussolini and Adolph Hitler and led to great destruction and human suffering before they could be defeated. Constructive engagement in postwar Iraq is critically important to America's long- term interests. As the world's sole remaining Superpower, America simply cannot afford to fail to lead.

I have serious reservations about this vote because despite the brilliant and valiant action of our soldiers to defeat the evil regime of Saddam Hussein, this administration has failed to implement an adequate plan to win the peace. This administration has failed to level with the American people and the Congress about the true costs and duration of the ongoing war in Iraq. I voted to authorize the use of force to overthrow Saddam Hussein, had the world is undoubtedly a better place with him out of power. But the Administration's evasions and misrepresentations of the truth represent a deeply troubling lack of honesty. The American people and their Representatives in Congress deserve true and honest presentation of the facts, especially on such weighty matters of war and peace.

I am also concerned that the Administration has failed to work cooperatively with our friends and allies abroad to secure international support to share the burden for rebuilding Iraq. It is not only in America's interest that Iraq emerge from Saddam's grip as a stable, peaceful nation; it is also in the world's interest. The Administration's diplomatic failures have forced the American taxpayers to bear too much of the burden for an effort that should draw a great international coalition. This Administration must redouble diplomatic efforts to bring all the nations of the world on board the efforts to rebuild Iraq and secure relief from Iraq's international debt incurred by the deposed regime.

Finally, I am reluctant to support this bill because this Administration has failed to provide effective leadership on real problems we have right here at home in America. The Administration is shortchanging education by $20 billion under the new No Child Left Behind law. Despite more than $300 billion in unmet school construction needs, this Administration has provided no leadership to upgrade educational infrastructure in America. And as rural North Carolina begs for a tobacco buyout, this Administration refuses to act to give our struggling farmers some hope for economic security for their families. These are just a few examples of the failure of leadership of this Administration.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, despite my reservations, I will support this bill because failure to lead is not an option. I will support this bill because it is the best option we have before us to win the peace in Iraq. I will support this bill on behalf of the people of North Carolina's Second Congressional District and the men and women in our armed forces.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to call on this Congress to pass school construction legislation to create jobs and improve education here in America. More than 3 million workers have lost their jobs in this sorry economy; over 2 million were in manufacturing sectors alone. My State of North Carolina has seen devastating job losses in such vital industries as textiles, furniture, and tobacco.

Congress must act now to get America working again. We should start by passing legislation to put people to work building schools. In many urban and rural areas of this country, schools are crumbling and localities lack the resources to rebuild. In many communities in my district, schools are bursting at the seams from overcrowding.

Since my first term in this body, I have worked to pass school construction. This year's version, H.R. 717, will provide $25 billion in zero interest bonds for school construction in this country. This bill will put workers back to work building quality schools for our country.

Mr. Speaker, Congress will soon consider the President's request for $87 billion for Iraqi reconstruction, including building new schools. The President is going to get his money, but we need to spend some money here at home on schools. So Congress should pass H.R. 717 to build schools in America.

Mr. Speaker, I join the gentlewoman in strong support of this motion.

This House needs to send a clear signal to the conference committee and the administration that we expect them to keep their promises regarding upholding the moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf.

The moratorium on drilling in the OCS along the east and west coasts has a long history of bipartisan support as well as the Gulf and Florida. For more than 20 years, Congress has included language in the Interior appropriations bill that prevents the Department of Interior funding from being used for leasing, preleasing, and related activities in these OCS areas.

In 1990, the first President Bush signed an executive moratorium placing a 10-year moratorium on new leasing on the OCS. In 1998, that moratorium was extended and renewed by President Bill Clinton and extended until 2012. Even our current President included traditional legislation moratorium language in his budget request to enable continued protection of these OCS areas.

When the House considered H.R. 6 earlier this year, it included a provision that violated our bipartisan tradition of protecting the Outer Continental Shelf. This provision would have effectively overturned the moratorium by opening sensitive coastal and marine areas off the shores of my home State of North Carolina and the entire east and west coasts to exploratory drilling under the guise of conducting an ``inventory.''

This so-called inventory is merely the tip of an iceberg. And as icebergs conceal their true size under the water, so does this inventory conceal this author's true intent to force open the doors for future massive exploration and drilling in the OCS protected area.

Mr. Speaker, my State's pristine beaches are vitally important to our tourism, fishing, and transportation industries, as are the beaches of all of our States. North Carolina coastlines have often been used for the film industry. It is a beautiful environmental area, and it should not be violated.

The people of North Carolina do not want to wake up and see oil splashing on our beaches.

The people of North Carolina do not want to wake up to see oil on the beaches of Cape Hatteras or dying wildlife poisoned by split deadly crude on the shores and sounds. We want our coastline protected from such threats.

The House in its wisdom passed an amendment to remove the offensive inventory provision from H.R. 6, and the Senate energy bill does not contain a similar provision. But we should leave nothing to chance.

Let us make sure the will of the House of Representatives is honored in conference. Let's not let this iceberg cause a wreck that will lead to oil lapping up on the shores of the east and west coasts.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of her motion to instruct.

Mr. Speaker, this evening I will be joined here by a number of my colleagues from not only North Carolina but from States along the east coast that were hit by Hurricane Isabel with devastating force several weeks ago, and a number of lives were lost in my home State. More lives were lost, of course, as the storm made its way up the east coast through Virginia into the District of Columbia as it continued to move forward. And, of course, the amount of water that was dropped created flood conditions in some parts of the east coast that they have not seen for a long time.

This evening, though, let me speak specifically about North Carolina and then we will cover some of the other issues. And my colleagues are going to join me in a few minutes. But I want to express my appreciation this evening, Mr. Speaker, to some hard-working folks who came to North Carolina really before the storm hit, from FEMA and the emergency management people in North Carolina, Under Secretary Beatty and Governor Easley, who really were planning in getting ready.

We had a lot of advance planning and time to get ready for the storm when it was a category 5. Unfortunately, no matter how well you plan, you cannot stop the wind damage, nor can you stop the tidal surge. And that is what created tremendous damage. We have roughly 400 FEMA workers in North Carolina as I speak this evening helping door to door.

I appreciate this opportunity to bring to my colleagues' attention in this House the issues as they relates to recovery costs from this devastating hurricane. I have to my right here a photograph of a road. You know, most of us think it hit the coast and that is where it ended. This was well inland. This really is a road here, and you see how it was washed out.

I want to turn, though, to the next photograph. And I am going to leave this up and refer to it from time to time. This is a small rural village, the county seat, of Hyde County. It is not in my district, but I have a lot of friends who live there. When I was State superintendent of schools, I spent time with my friends there. And this small town is under water, or was under water.

What is so sad and devastating about this situation is when Hurricane Floyd hit in 1999, they saw flooding, substantial flooding. They borrowed money through SBA and other sources and with the FEMA money razed their homes, did the things they needed to do. And now the whole town is flooded, not just part of it, the whole town.

And I could cite stories all over the East, and my colleagues are going to talk about more of those this evening, so I will let them join me in just a minute. But as it roared ashore on Thursday, September 18, I could not help but think that Hurricane Fran that hit in 1996 came on a Thursday, Hurricane Floyd which was the 500-year flood, came on a Thursday, it seems like Thursdays in September are not the kind of days in North Carolina when you have got a storm coming you want to look forward to.

But as this storm roared through North Carolina and into Virginia and Maryland, its effects were felt all the way up into West Virginia and Pennsylvania and finally ultimately in Canada. Although it lost its strength as it came inland, it was a huge storm. And the fury of this storm touched millions of people along the east coast. A lot of folks were without power for a week. I was told today that finally, after now roughly almost 2 weeks, all the power is back on in North Carolina.

It destroyed homes, as I said. It destroyed whole towns, it flooded them, and it literally devastated crops. And I will talk about that more as the evening goes on with my colleagues.

And I am sorry to say that in North Carolina we lost five of our citizens as a result of this storm. And as is the case many times with a hurricane or storm that moves inland, we lose more lives from freshwater flooding than we do along the coast.

We asked our friends in North Carolina to send a photograph to us tonight to use to share with our colleagues, because many have seen the photographs or the things on TV as it relates to the Outer Banks and Hatteras and Ocracoke and others. This little small town is in a rural county; and, I dare say, no one has seen this photograph in Hyde County of Swan Quarter, a fishing village with some great people.

So far, 26 counties in North Carolina have been declared Federal disaster areas. And we just got word that the declaration may be extended to several more counties, and it should be. And I trust the people at FEMA will do it quickly. Because there is a lot of debris.

I talked this evening with a person who works for the State of North Carolina who works with our fishermen on the coast. And because of all the debris that has been washed on shore and clogged up the channels, many of our fishermen who would like to go out and earn a living, that even though the storm has passed, there is so much debris they cannot set the nets, their crab pots have been washed away. It is just devastating to their economic livelihood.

Preliminary damage estimates indicate, and these are only preliminary, the numbers will change, that North Carolina local governments have incurred more than $55 million in damages, an assessment for individual losses thus far and is continuing to rise as those numbers come in.

This is a State, as I said earlier, that was hit with Hurricane Fran in 1996 that created untold hundreds of millions of dollars, actually in the billions of dollars, of damage, a devastating flood in 1999, ice storms et cetera. I will talk about that more later. 1.8 million acres of three of our State's most important crops were heavily damaged: peanuts, cotton, and soybeans. And the shame of it is it comes to one of the areas of my State where there is very little manufacturing. Agriculture is the lifeblood of many of these communities. And it comes less than 1 year after our farmers suffered one of the worst droughts that we have faced in a long, long time.

Sometimes those of us in North Carolina feel that our State has become a sort of disaster central. We get an awful lot of disasters. Some have said

that when you dial 911, it rings in North Carolina. They are really talking about when hurricanes head in. And they normally hit North Carolina because it sort of sticks out in the ocean, if you look at the maps.

In the past several years, as I have said, we have had two major hurricanes, a major ice storm, and a drought. That is why the economy of our State is in such tough shape right now. Along with the manufacturing jobs we have lost, it has had a heavy impact. We have lost the second largest number of manufacturing jobs in the country, second only to Michigan.

Fortunately, because of the advanced technology that we enjoy today, Isabel was one of the best forecast storms that we have had in a long, long time. We needed direction and they told us about where it was going to hit and it hit there, the approximate wind speed, and they were right. But as I said earlier, we could not control the waves; we could not control the wind. And a lot of damage was done.

However, as these two photographs show, there is water in every house in this small town. The whole town is flooded. One thing that we can improve upon that we do not now have the ability to do is that we ought to be able to determine the hydrology of how much water is going to fall so we will know what the flood levels are.

Most of our Nation's hurricane preparedness efforts have been focused on tracking storms, telling close communities to leave, and they did in this one. It saved a lot of lives, and we are grateful for that. But we cannot deal with the surge. With early warnings, communities can take necessary preparedness and protect our citizens and, in many cases, protect property as was done along the North Carolina coast to the extent we could.

However, as was demonstrated by Hurricane Floyd in 1999, Tropical Storm Alison in 2002, and now Hurricane Isabel this year, we need to improve our ability to raise the awareness of our inland residents of the destructive nature of flooding.

And we can do something about it. A study done by Ed Rappaport of the Tropical Prediction Center shows that since 1970 fresh water flooding has caused 59 percent of storm deaths in the United States in all storms, whereas only 1 percent of the losses of life have come from coastal storm surges, and that is true in this storm.

That is why in the 107th Congress my colleagues joined me as I introduced and we got passed the Tropical Cyclone Inland Forecasting Improvement and Warning System Development Act. That is a long title to say we need a little bit of money to find out where the flash floods are going to be, how high they will be, so when we tell a person there will be a flash flood, they will know whether it will be 6 inches or 6 feet. There is a big difference in that to save lives.

This law authorizes a small sum, only $1.15 million a year for 5 years to provide the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, with additional resources to enhance the science of flood prediction and, most importantly, develop an important, effective flood warning index that will really save lives. We can do it. We have the technology to do it. It takes just a few dollars to help make our citizens here in the United States of America, who are paying the taxes, safer and to save lives.

We need to better understand the damage these storms can cause and better inform our citizens of the danger these storms pose.

I am working hard with my colleagues and this delegation and others to provide the funding this year to bring the process of developing an inland flood forecasting and warning system that our communities will have so that when the next hurricanes come, hopefully we will have a way to deal with it and we will be better informed to share with our citizens.

Mr. Speaker, it is now my privilege to yield to my colleague really from the Northeast, whose district encompasses a lot of the area that received substantial damage, a hard-working member who has really spent a lot of time working with his colleagues, working to make sure we get the money, to make a difference, to help his people back home, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballance). I thank the gentleman for his hard work.

Mr. Speaker, since the gentleman is talking about the number of meals, I was looking through my notes here, and I think it is a good point to share with my colleagues.

As these things happen, it is amazing what happens with our neighbors and friends and our first responders. In many of these areas, especially in the gentleman's area and down east, almost all of them are volunteers. They are very few paid fire, rescue and other folks. They were out working 24 hours a day really in some cases. As a matter of fact, in Franklin County we lost a volunteer firemen who was killed as a result of being out that night, hit by a tree.

My notes indicate, as of today, a note I just received from Secretary Beatty, the governor's person who is in charge of Emergency Management, Crime Patrol and Public Safety, that in North Carolina the volunteer groups and Red Cross and Salvation Army, the North Carolina Baptist Men, and I am sure a lot of these that you talked about in churches, probably are not in this number that had prepared meals. They had prepared 623,168 meals to people in eastern North Carolina.

That gives you some idea what the devastation was. For many of these folks, not only are they living in shelters; FEMA has had to move in portable trailers because their homes are uninhabitable as they try to work through it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I just have gotten a copy of a document from Department of Homeland Security and FEMA where those counties have now been declared part of this disaster area.

I now want to yield to my colleague, the gentleman from the 4th Congressional District (Mr. Price). When he was talking about being without power, he and I remember very vividly, as busy as we were with Floyd, Fran hit us real hard, and I will never forget being out of power for a week. One of the things I always said, you really knew who your friend was then. It was the people who shared ice with you in September when it was really hot, but that being said, we need not forget tonight that a lot of these people in eastern North Carolina, even though we have got FEMA there working, all of our friends working, there is some insurance available, there is going to be a lot of hurt and need, and we are going to need to work together to make sure resources are available because, if not, some of these communities, as total communities, will have real problems continuing to exist, and a lot of our agricultural friends will not be able to make it. There is not enough insurance. The State's going to have to come up with about a 25 percent match. I think these are the kind of times when our States face some tough times, but the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) has been there every step of the way helping in this, and I want to thank him, and I yield to him now for his comments.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for not only joining us this evening but, more importantly, for his leadership and his hard work on the Committee on Appropriations, as we work through other issues dealing with a host of other issues. I remember the challenge we had with Hurricane Floyd, which was one of the most devastating things we dealt with in FEMA, and you were there carrying a full load and a half, and we appreciate that and all your efforts, and I

thank the gentleman for his leadership in this area, and I know the people of North Carolina appreciate it as well and others across the country because I think you appropriately pointed out, and I thank you for that, it is really when one part of the country is affected, all of us as Americans are affected and as tax-paying citizens.

I want to express again my appreciation to our friends in North Carolina at the Emergency Management. I was there on Wednesday evening late, and again Thursday morning for the briefings, and I would encourage my colleagues in the Congress, if you have not been to visit the folks, you ought to go by and visit them. It is kind of hard to say you ought to go when they are having an emergency, but when you have got an impending disaster, to see all these groups come together, FEMA, the power companies, the different areas, the National Guard, the Red Cross, all these different volunteer groups who are in the same meeting and they get all the briefings on the weather, et cetera, and each one has to report what they are doing, where they are throughout the day, as they get ready, as the storm is approaching.

I did that on Thursday morning and then went down to Fort Bragg which was the staging area for FEMA where they brought in something like 19 or 20 trailers loaded with fuel. That just happened to be one of many staging areas in North Carolina. They were ready for the storm to hit, and as soon as it hit and they could get in, they started disbursing things. It shows that I guess in North Carolina, we have been through it a lot, and they sort of know how to get ready, but so does a lot of other parts of the country. It is a great tribute I think to how we work together to get things done, Federal, State and local, and we can work together when we need to, and I appreciate that.

I know on Friday morning after the storm had hit and such devastation was out there, I joined with the interim Agricultural Commission to fly around the State to take a look at not only the home loss and road damage, but also agricultural damage. And we flew over to Lewisburg and Rocky Mount, Roanoke Rapids over by Hoskey, landed in Elizabeth City where they had no power. Everything was being run by a generator. Part of the buildings were gone, as you can appreciate in a major hurricane, and back over Edenton, a beautiful city right there on the Sound and back into the Raleigh, and it almost breaks your heart to see these, as we know, the really colonial towns that took such a hammering in the storm.

I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), for all his hard work and for those remarks. He is absolutely correct.

Mr. Speaker, I would now yield to my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballance).

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, and then I will yield back to him, because I think that is important to remember.

The gentleman mentioned our firemen and others who used chainsaws. So many times when we think in terms of our first responders, emergency folks, the EMS people who save lives and go out, we fail to realize they do more than that. They are doing other things in the community, especially our firemen, and especially in rural parts of this country.

I remember as a small child growing up in rural eastern North Carolina seeing a tobacco barn burn, because that is where I grew up, and I will never forget watching it burn. There was nothing my parents could do. And I am sure they did not have insurance on it. And the gentleman knows exactly what I am talking about, as he grew up there. What a frightening thing that was as a child. And I had no concept, as small as I was, that that was part of the year's income for the family and that was going to be devastating for the family in terms of the economic loss. But to see that fire as it moved, and there was nothing you could do, absolutely nothing.

Then we started to form volunteer fire departments, and they had just trucks. And today we call on them to do more than that. In this flood they did not have to put out a fire; they were saving people from flooded buildings. They were going in with their heavy equipment where they could and getting people out of buildings, as were our emergency personnel. We call on them to do more and more. And we in this Congress, I think, beyond FEMA and the things we need to do, should not forget that we have a partnership with these local volunteers, Federal, State and local, to help them and their families. Because they are giving an awful lot of time in emergencies. They are at the table. They are called to be at the table.

Our National Guard folks in North Carolina, we called them up, what few we had left. About half of them had been called up for Iraq, but we called up something like 800 to 1,000. And we still have tonight, I understand, somewhere in the neighborhood of 220, 230 still on duty in different places of the State, especially in eastern North Carolina where they are still trying to continue to move things before they are deactivated.

And, Mr. Speaker, I yield back to my colleague.

Along that line, Mr. Speaker, as we were talking about our volunteers, we have a bill in, as the gentleman well knows because he is a cosponsor of it and which I introduced, to provide a benefit. This fireman that lost his life in Franklin County may have very well have been eligible as a volunteer for the death benefit for those who are saving people's lives or helping save lives and ultimately give their life in that regards. That is something this Congress can do. I think currently we have about 276 Members who have signed that piece of legislation. Last time I checked, it takes about 218 to pass it. I hope we will move it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, my friend from the first district, for joining me this evening in this Special Order and to share with our colleagues here what North Carolina has gone through. And it is not just North Carolina when a hurricane hits. This one hit in North Carolina, but bad storms do not really know where county lines or State lines are; they just keep rolling. In this case, it rolled right through Virginia, where there was tremendous devastation in Virginia and in Richmond; and it rolled up into Maryland and the District of Columbia, where we saw power lines down, and we have seen here recently where people lost power and there was a fear that we would have flooding on a scale here in this city unlike what we had seen since the 1930s.

So it was a devastating storm that caused immense damage and a lot of heartache and loss of life. And the loss of lives were substantially more in Virginia and Maryland as it moved up the coast. Lives were lost, and the storm caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to homes, roads, crops, and livestock. In North Carolina, I have to add beyond livestock, poultry too. We sort of think of that as being a little different.

The truth is many of these people that lost, even though FEMA is there helping and they have some insurance, they will not be made whole. They are coming up short. And the shame of it is that for many of them they had the flood in 1999, some of them did, the drought hit them last year, and now they have gotten a real bad body blow this year with another storm. I have talked to a number of the farmers and the interim commissioner of agriculture, and he is afraid some of these people just will not make it. And it is not because they are not good folks, they are not good farmers, they are not good people. It is just the fact that nature has hit them hard.

I hope that FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security, the administration, and certainly this Congress, recognize the need to support these storm-damaged areas through recovery and rebuilding, not only just on the outer banks of North Carolina, as we suffered in our State, but in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, and other places in Pennsylvania and up West Virginia, matter of fact, traveling all the way into Canada. I do not really think we are going to reach to Canada, but certainly we want to help our people here at home.

The United States has an outstanding and a very commendable record of responding to disasters around the globe. We are usually the first ones there. But I think now we need to respond with the same kind of effort and the same level of enthusiasm when disaster hits here at home. These are our neighbors. They are our friends. They are taxpaying citizens of the United States of America. And as my friends and colleagues have pointed out, they are not looking for a handout. They do not want that. They want an opportunity to get back in business, to get their lives back in order, and to once again be contributing taxpaying citizens of America.

They will do it. But they would do it a whole lot quicker if we could help them. North Carolina is suffering through one of the toughest economic times we have seen in a long time, and I commit to my colleagues that we are going to join hands and ask all our other colleagues from North Carolina and across the aisle, because these people in North Carolina need our help, and in Virginia and Maryland. It is our obligation, in my opinion, to make sure the job gets done.

Let me thank my colleagues one again, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballance), from the first district, whose district really was hit hard. Very hard. I think I only have about three counties, well four, Vance, Franklin, Nash, and possibly Sampson may be put in that group that have been declared disaster counties. Others may be added. At least one more. But it is tough.

I remember going through Floyd, when almost all of them were in it, and it is tough to see people lose everything they have. I remember when I went in the Rocky Mountains, and the lady was sitting beside the road trying to go through a family Bible. It was wet, and that was all she had been able to save because that had her family photographs in it. These are the kinds of things that happen. These are the things you cannot replace. But we sure can help them get their lives back in order.

I thank my colleagues for their help in this Special Order this evening. We will keep our colleagues up to date on what is happening in North Carolina and with our friends in Virginia and Maryland.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in strong support of the Edwards motion to instruct conferees on the fiscal year 2004 Defense Authorization Act.

Specifically, I support the Senate provision on making the increase in imminent danger pay and family separation allowance permanent for all our armed service members and their families and applying the increase to all those in imminent danger no matter where they are serving. And let me tell my colleagues why.

In April, Congress passed the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations bill to fund military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. I voted for that bill because I strongly support our men and women in the armed services.

This bill provided temporary increases in imminent danger pay and family separation allowances, but they are due to expire on September 30, 2003, less than 3 weeks from now.

Specifically, the bill we passed in April temporarily increased the imminent danger/hostile fire pay from $150 to $225 a month. It also temporarily increased the family separation allowance, which helps military families pay rent, child care and other expenses while the soldier is away from $100 to $250 a month.

I represent one of the largest military bases in this country, and when the call comes from the White House, it is the 9/11 post in this country. Both the House and Senate have passed defense authorization bills that deal with those expiring provisions, but the Senate-passed bill is superior to the House version in two key ways. First, the Senate provision makes permanent the increase in imminent danger and hostile fire pay and the family separation allowance. The Senate bill also provides increases for all of our armed services in imminent danger, whereas the House bill only covers those serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. That provisions leaves our soldiers in dangerous places, and leaves them out, young men and women serving in Liberia, Kosovo and elsewhere.

When our soldiers are getting shot at for the sole reason they are wearing our Nation's uniform, it is indefensible to shortchange our soldiers serving in areas that may not be the political focus of this Congress or the administration.

As a congressman who represents Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base and the special operations soldiers that are called on daily to serve around the world, and many of the guard and reserve units who are now on duty, I strongly support the permanent increase in imminent danger and hostile fire pay and family allowances for our soldiers and their families. Our military personnel and their families right now are under enormous strain. They are stretched very thin. Our servicemen are being subjected to longer deployments and more frequent deployments than ever before.

Just 2 days ago it was announced that the deployment of reservists and National Guard in the combat theater have been extended from 6 months to 1 year. About half of our active duty Army is currently deployed abroad, up from 20 percent just 2 years ago.

Let me say I supported Operation Iraqi Freedom. I voted to authorize the President to conduct the operation and rid the world of Saddam Hussein, but now our servicemen are paying the price. We have now lost more soldiers lives since the President announced the end of the combat operation than suffered in combat. Our soldiers are serving in the war zone. They cannot speak for themselves on this vital issue. They are counting on their elected representatives in Congress to stand up for them. I intend to do so, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the Edwards motion.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Edwards motion to instruct conferees on the FY 2004 Department of Defense Authorization Act. Specifically, I support the Senate provisions on making the increase in imminent danger pay and family separation allowance permanent for our armed services and their families and applying the increase to all those in imminent danger, no matter where they are serving.

In April, Congress passed the Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations bill to fund military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. I voted for that bill because I strongly support our men and women in the armed services. This bill provided temporary increases in imminent danger pay and family separation allowances, but they are due to expire on September 30, less than 3 weeks from now.

Specifically, the bill we passed in April temporarily increased the imminent danger/hostile fire pay from $150 to $225 per month. It also temporarily increased the family separation allowance, which helps military families pay rent, child care and other expenses while soldiers are away, from $100 to $250 per month.

Both the House and Senate have passed defense authorization bills that deal with these expiring provisions. But the Senate-passed bill is superior to the House version in two key ways. First, the Senate provisions make permanent the increases in imminent danger and hostile fire pay and the family separation allowance. The Senate bill also provides increases for all of our armed forces in imminent danger, whereas the House bill only covers those serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. That limitation leaves out our soldiers in dangerous places like Liberia, Kosovo and elsewhere.

When our soldiers are getting shot at for the sole reason that they are wearing our Nation's uniform, it is indefensible to shortchange soldiers serving in areas that may not be the political focus of the administration or the Congress.

As the Congressman for Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base and many guard and reserve units, I strongly support a permanent increase in imminent danger and hostile fire pay and family allowances for our soldiers and their families. Our military personnel and their families right now are under enormous strain. They are stretched ordinarily thin. Our service members are being subjected to longer deployments and more frequent deployments than ever before. Just 2 days ago, it was announced that the deployment of Reservists and National Guard in the combat theater has been extended from 6 months to 1 year. About half of the active- duty Army is currently deployed abroad--up from 20 percent just 2 years ago.

Let me say that I support Operation Iraqi Freedom, and I voted to authorize the President to conduct the operation to rid the world of Saddam Hussein's evil rule. I am tremendously proud of our men and women in uniform who have demonstrated the American way of dealing with tyrants who terrorize their own reigon and threaten the peace and stability of the larger world. Saddam Hussein got what he deserved. But now our service members are paying the price. We have now lost more soldiers' lives since the President announced the end of combat than we suffered in that combat. Our soldiers serving in the war zone cannot speak for themselves on this vital issue. They are counting on their elected Representatives in Congress to stand up for them. I intend to do so, and I urge all my colleagues to join me in voting for the Edwards motion.

Mr. Speaker, I ask permission to speak out of order and to take the time of the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, as the second anniversary of September 11 approaches, I rise this evening to pay tribute to our Nation's fallen firefighters, law enforcement officers and emergency medical service personnel. Mr. Speaker, every day public service officers protect our families and possessions from fire, they keep our streets safe and are the first to respond to an emergency. Across this Nation, our public safety officers are dedicated and prepared. They truly embody the values and spirit that make America the great Nation that it is. These men and women are dedicated, and when we call on them, they risk their lives for all of us. Our firefighters, law enforcement officers and EMS workers are truly our hometown heroes. However, all too often these heroes must give their lives in the line of duty.

For the family of these brave souls, Congress created the Public Safety Officers Benefit. Since its inception 25 years ago, this important benefit has provided surviving families with financial assistance during their desperate times of need. However, a glitch in the law prevents some families from receiving the assistance. Heart attacks and strokes are among the greatest threat to public safety officers, especially firefighters. In fact, almost half of all firefighter deaths in the line of duty are due to heart attacks and strokes. Fighting fire is dangerous, exhausting and extremely stressful work. Indeed, a firefighter's chances of suffering a heart attack or stroke greatly increases when he or she puts on the gear and rushes into a building to fight a fire. Likewise, law enforcement officers, correction officers and EMS workers face daily situations that put stress and strain on their heart. Imagine the scenario where, while fighting a house fire, a company of firefighters tragically loses two of its members. One is killed by a piece of falling debris. The other dies of a heart attack in the same building. Under current law, the family of the firefighter who suffered the fatal blow to the head receives their benefit, but the family of the heart attack victim receives nothing.

It is wrong that these families are denied this benefit when their loved ones are suffering the loss of a loved one in our communities.

A constituent of mine, Mike Williams, of Bunnlevel, North Carolina, who works for the Office of State Fire Marshal, alerted me to this glitch in the law after Ms. Deborah Brooks, the widow of Thomas Brooks of Lumberton, North Carolina, was denied benefits because of this technicality in the law. Mr. Brooks, a master firefighter with the Lumberton Fire Department, tragically died of a heart attack after returning from several calls on an evening shift. They found him dead the next morning.

As part of his duties with the state fire marshal, Mike helps families file for public safety officer benefits, and he has received many benefit rejection letters from the U.S. Department of Justice. This rejection letter in Thomas Brooks' case was one too many. Mike wrote to me and asked that we investigate the situation. We tried with other Members of this Congress to correct that technicality in the law administratively. We found out it could not be done.

During the last Congress, I, along with my colleagues, introduced the Hometown Heroes Benefit Act to correct this technicality in the Public

Safety Officer Benefit. This bipartisan piece of legislation will allow the families of public safety officers who were killed by a heart attack or stroke while on duty within 24 hours after participating in a training exercise or responding to an emergency situation to receive the benefits that they are due.

Last year, the Committee on the Judiciary and the full House unanimously passed it. Unfortunately, we were not able to move the bill through the United States Senate before adjourning, despite the strong support from several Senators of both parties.

Earlier this year, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), and I introduced the Hometown Heroes Survival Benefit Act. The United States Senate has already unanimously passed a Senate bill, S. 459, a companion bill introduced by Senators Leahy and Graham.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 929 is the kind of bipartisan legislation that we should be working on in this House. As of this afternoon, we have 273 cosponsors. I will remind my colleagues it takes 218 in this House to pass a bill. Both Democrats and Republicans are on board. More cosponsors are on the way.

I urge all of my colleagues to continue to sponsor H.R. 919, and I ask the House leadership to put this bill to a vote. It will pass unanimously. During this time of increasing awareness and concern regarding the threat of terrorism, we are calling on our public safety officers to work longer and harder than ever before. Our hometown heroes deserve to know that we support and appreciate their extraordinary bravery and heroism.

As we take time to remember those who were killed or injured in the attacks on September 11 this week, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 919 and let public safety officers know we will continue to stand with them and with their families. We can do no less.