Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my heartfelt congratulations to a wonderful company whose roots are deeply immersed in the history of southern Oregon and our nation. Harry and David, a mail-order food-gift company located in Medford, Oregon, is celebrating its 70th anniversary, a milestone that speaks to America's enduring fondness for Harry and David products and services.

Well-known nationwide for their direct marketing of gourmet food and fruit gifts, the Harry and David Company is also known as a valuable member of the southern Oregon business community. Countless southern Oregon families have worked for Harry and David over the years and have helped shape their successful growth as a company.

Mr. Speaker, over the years the Harry and David Company has expanded from its initial gourmet gift fruit offerings to include fine chocolates and confections, as well as baked goods, meats, snack foods and home decor items. Today Harry and David ships more than 7.5 million gifts each year, including a staggering 4 million packages during the holiday season.

When you look back and consider the company's history, its accomplishments are even more impressive. After inheriting their father's Medford, Oregon, orchard in 1914, brothers Harry and David Holmes established a successful business shipping their signature fruit, the Royal Riviera Pear, to the grand hotels and restaurants of Europe. For 15 years, the brothers' business expanded as demand for their luxury fruit grew until the Great Depression impacted the market. Through extraordinary perseverance, the Holmes brothers pushed on and in 1934 built the foundation for the famously successful company we know today.

Mr. Speaker, Harry and David has truly grown to become one of the crown jewels of Oregon, and I am proud to offer my congratulations to the Harry and David Company on its 70th anniversary. Oregon is fortunate to host such a magnificent enterprise, and I am confident the next 70 years will bring the company continued success.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I rise in opposition to the Udall amendment.

I appreciate the gentleman's comments, though, about the need to have

science involved in these decisions. Perhaps he will want to support my Sound Science for Endangered Species Act provisions that require precisely that, independent, National Academy of Science panel review of decisions to list or de-list endangered species because I think science does play a role and we ought to get it right.

We ought to get it right here, too. I am glad that he has gone back 20 years and looked at the regulations from then, but they do not work now. They do not work because in a 15-year planning process under the Federal Forest Management Land Act, it takes 7 years of that 15 to come up with a plan on how to manage the forest. So you spend nearly half the time coming up with a plan.

And then those who are concerned about costs, and we heard about it in the prior amendment, $7.5 million on average to do these plans. Seven years, $7.5 million and all the while if you look over here, this is what is happening to your forests. They are getting overgrown, you are getting windthrow, blowdown, disease. As we wait and fiddle and plan for 7 years or longer and spend millions and millions of dollars pushing paper through the appeals process and everything else, Mother Nature eventually acts and this is what you get: catastrophic fire that kills firefighters, destroys homes and if you like this for habitat, you got another think coming. This is what you get.

We have to change these rules and regulations. The administration did receive 195,000 comments and they looked at them. They revised their draft plans. These regulations actually protect a wider range of species and are designed to promote action by Forest Service managers well before any need to list species under the ESA. The draft regulations provide for public involvement at every step of the way. They preserve appeal opportunities like those in the 2000 regulations proposed by President Clinton and go well beyond the minimum requirements of NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act. More timely and transparent planning will further facilitate effective public participation. That is really the key, effective public participation.

Mr. Chairman, this is what the Society of American Foresters says about this amendment by my colleague:

``The Society of American Foresters is opposed to efforts to circumvent, through funding elimination or other means, the USDA Forest Service's effort to implement new planning regulations.'' That is Michael Goergen, Executive Vice President, Society of American Foresters.

Here is what the labor unions say about this. Mr. Mike Draper, Vice President, Western District, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America:

``If Mr. Udall's rider passes, the Forest Service will be forced to rely on outdated rules written in 1982 or to implement a flawed series of regulations from 2000.''

Professional foresters say this rider is not the way to go. Labor says this rider is not the way to go. Taxpayer groups ought to be saying this rider on an appropriations bill is the wrong way to go. If you care about the cost to the taxpayer, here is a vote that you ought to make as a no; $7.5 million per plan, 7 years to plan what to do in a national forest. In the Black Hills National Forest in South Dakota, $7.5 million and 7 years. The Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest in Colorado, $5.5 million and 7 years. The Tongass that we were all so concerned about in the last vote and remain concerned about in Alaska, $13 million and 9 years to do the plan. We can do better than that, and we should. We owe it to our forests and our future to do better than that, to spend the money not in the planning process that goes on forever, that results in no action except catastrophic fire in many cases, but rather a planning process that produces results and actions that will help bring forests help, that will help protect species and the environment for generations to come.

Let us spend the money on the ground, in the forests, fixing fish passage, fixing culverts and roads that now block this fish passage. Let us do the healthy forest things we all agreed in this Congress to do when we passed the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. Let us get out there and do the thinning so that we do not end up with forests that are so clogged with overgrown trees, that suffer from blowdown of forest that you cannot get in and do anything about it. Because when we put off the action because we are too busy planning, the result can be, not always, but can certainly be catastrophic.

I urge a no vote on the Udall amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with you and my colleagues my distinct pride in a winning institution in my district, the Oregon Institute of Technology (OIT). Located in Klamath Falls, Oregon, OIT is nationally recognized for its high standards and results-oriented approach to education. The school motto, ``First Hired, Highest Paid,'' is no idle boast. A few years ago I had the honor of serving as commencement speaker during an OIT graduation, and nearly all of the graduates I addressed had been offered high-paying jobs.

Ably led by President Martha Anne Dow, OIT pursues excellence in every aspect of the college experience, from research and technology application to career-oriented instruction and competitive athletics.

Mr. Speaker, it is in the realm of athletics that OIT most recently demonstrated its championship mettle when the men's basketball team won the NAIA Division II National Title. Seeded 16th, the OIT Hustlin' Owls were not favored to win, but when the final buzzer sounded they had proven themselves to be the best team in the nation among NAIA Division II teams. Their series of upset victories may have surprised some sportscasters, but it was no surprise to the fans of OIT who have come to expect great things from the Hustlin' Owls under the phenomenal coaching of Danny Miles.

Coach Danny Miles, a NAIA Hall of Fame coach, took over a losing basketball program at OIT thirty-three years ago and never looked back. Racking up 734 career wins, Danny ranks 17th on the all-time career victory list. It is no surprise that this year he was named NAIA Coach of the Year, an honor that he shares with his able staff: Mike Pisan, Doug Kintzinger, Jarrod Davis, Milijia Mitrovic, and Aristide Agnimel.

Although Coach Miles is proud to have won the national championship, he is even more proud of the fact that he, his staff, his team, and the OIT fans won the James Naismith Award for sportsmanship. This was not just a victory of superior athleticism and coaching; it was a victory of strong character.

I join the OIT family in my pride over senior Kevin Baker's winning the tournament's Most Valuable Player award. Baker was also joined by teammates Florian Houget and Todd Matthews on the All-Tournament team. It goes without saying that a championship performance involves every team member, so I also want to share with you my pride in Hustlin' Owls Michael Nunes, Jared Hall, Levell Hesia, Joe Billings, David Michaelis, Matt Johnson, Elijah Page, and Alex Carlson, each of whom contributed so much to their team's winning effort.

Mr. Speaker, for those who are familiar with the story of the Klamath Basin in my district, you know the story of a strong, proud people who live their lives with heart and determination. It is no surprise that the bond between OIT and the Klamath community is so strong. They share the character of winners who never, ever give up. We can all find inspiration from OIT's achievements, many more of which I expect to recognize in the future.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his work on this legislation.

I want to acknowledge up front that I am a broadcast licensee, owner and operator of five radio stations, and I am very supportive of this bill in this form.

It was time that the broadcast community cleaned up the airwaves, that owners took the responsibility to make sure that the talent on their shows operated within the bounds of the law. It is important to note that this legislation does not change the standards that have always been on the books and recognized by the courts when it comes to clean talk on the airwaves.

This legislation, though, gives the FCC the fining authority it needs to deal with egregious violations of the law and also the incentive it needs to act, and act more appropriately.

For those of us who are small-community broadcasters, it also recognizes that the fine should fit and the punishment should be fair; and, therefore, it recognizes both the role of affiliates and their liabilities versus those providing the programming, as well as having the FCC recognize market size when levying fines. Because, indeed, a fine of a half a million dollars on a small-market broadcaster could spell bankruptcy, when on a large conglomerate, it may be just another cost of doing business.

I want to conclude my remarks this morning by having Americans and Members in this Chamber recognize fully that the actions that are taken by some broadcasters are not the actions taken by most broadcasters. Allowing indecent, profane, and obscene language on stations is something most of us find offensive, just as most Americans do. Broadcasters have made enormous contributions to their communities, raising money for charity, helping in emergencies, and providing that vital communication link.

Mr. Chairman, I support this bill. I thank the Chairman for his support of the amendments that were included.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to one of Oregon's finest citizens and most dedicated public servants, the late Benjamin ``Kip'' Lombard, Jr. It is with great sadness that I report that Kip passed away last year at the age of sixty-two, though he lives on in the memories of the many people he touched during his life and the grateful citizens on whose behalf he worked so tirelessly.

Mr. Speaker, Kip Lombard was a true son of the State of Oregon, and his love for his native state was evident in the many labors he performed for the betterment of his fellow Oregonians. Kip was blessed with both a keen intellect and the motivation to use his intellectual gifts in the service of others. He graduated with honors as a member of the first class of the University of Oregon Honors College, an institution reserved for only the most academically gifted. Knowing firsthand the value of a good education, Kip was a steadfast advocate for promoting academic excellence in Oregon. He served on the Jackson County Education Service District, Southern Oregon University's Regional Advisory Board, and as a volunteer on the Board of Directors of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association.

Mr. Speaker, while Kip's contributions to his community and state were diverse, he made perhaps his greatest mark in his role as State Representative. Kip served faithfully in the Oregon State Legislature from 1977 to 1985, where he quickly gained a reputation for his effectiveness, conviction, personal integrity and abiding respect for others. When the big jobs had to be done, Kip was always there, working relentlessly and forsaking the limelight. He was fiercely loyal to his southern Oregon constituents, yet committed to making Oregon the greatest state in the Union. He was, in short, a true gentleman and statesman in the finest tradition of Oregon's greatest public leaders.

Kip was widely respected for his thorough knowledge of Western water issues, both during his service in the legislature and in his law practice. As an attorney in private practice Kip brought the same high standards to his profession that he brought to the State House, and his clients were well served by him.

Mr. Speaker, although Kip's life was distinguished by many impressive accomplishments and the recognition that attended his achievements, I know that as a humble man his greatest source of pride was attaining the rank of Eagle Scout. Many of Kip's finest qualities were learned and nurtured in the Scouts, and he maintained a close relationship to Scouting throughout his life.

Kip Lombard's passing subtracts from the number of truly good men in this world, but it will be impossible for us ever to forget that Kip left this world a better place than he found it. Kip will always remain an inspiration to me, and his life's work will always represent the ideal of using one's God-given abilities on behalf of others.

Mr. Speaker, Kip was a man of many distinguished titles, but he valued none of them more highly than the titles of husband and father. I know the solemn pride that his wife, Bernadette, his children, Christopher and Ian, and his grandson, Samuel Benjamin, must certainly feel. While he has left their side in this world, I hope they find consolation in the knowledge that his was a life extremely well lived. For my part, I am grateful to have called Kip Lombard my friend and to have been associated with a man whose tireless work will benefit the State of Oregon for generations.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to pay special tribute to a fine American, a true gentleman and a good friend of mine, Lenn Hannon, on the occasion of his retirement from the Oregon State Senate. It is a pleasure to honor Lenn and his lovely wife, Dixie, who have stood together in public life for more than 30 years and together have made invaluable contributions to the State of Oregon and its people.

Mr. Speaker, Lenn Hannon traces his interest in public service to 1960 when, as a high school junior and member of the school band, Lenn had an opportunity to shake hands with a young Senator campaigning for President named John F. Kennedy. Inspired by Kennedy's call to public service, Lenn would go on to live his life by Kennedy's famous admonition: ``Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.''

Lenn began his career in public service in 1974, when he won a seat in the State Senate by a mere 37 votes. During his first years in the Senate, Hannon developed a reputation as a smart, open-minded and fair lawmaker whose concern for the people he represented was far greater than his concern for himself. In 1980, Lenn switched parties to become one of only seven Republicans in the State Senate. Over the years he gradually built up seniority to become the Senate's senior Republican and Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee. During this time, he devoted himself to a wide range of issues, from strengthening education and arts programs to combating substance abuse and managing federal land issues. One of his greatest accomplishments in the State Legislature was his success in helping to develop Southern Oregon University into a premiere educational institution for southern Oregon. The reverence his name inspires among SOU faculty, staff and alumni is a testament to his enduring contributions to the university.

Mr. Speaker, now that Lenn's service in the State Senate has come to an end, Lenn will serve on the State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision, a role that will allow him to continue serving the citizens of Oregon. He and Dixie will move to Salem for the new job, but their hearts will always remain in the community where they are so well loved.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating these extraordinary Americans, Lenn and Dixie Hannon. I would like to thank them both personally for all they have done for the people of southern Oregon, the Second District, and the State of Oregon. I wish Lenn and Dixie and their entire family all the best in future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Washington, with whom I have worked closely on this and other legislation to improve the great Northwest and certainly improve and protect America's forests. I want to thank the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), the chairman of the Committee on Resources, and certainly my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), for their yeoman's effort on this legislation; my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) as well for their work; and certainly the President of the United States, who on not one, but two occasions has come out to the Northwest to drive home the point that we had to pass legislation that embodies the principles contained in H.R. 1904.

I think it is especially important. There are not many of us who do not recognize that if we do not remove the ladder fuels that my colleague from California talked about, the old growth

policy that will be out there is one of let it burn, because that is what is happening today in America's forests. Because we have taken natural fire out of the equation and taken human management out of the equation, these forests have become completely overstocked. So it is like any other fire, it is about the fuel load. And the fuel load is such that when fire starts today, unlike 100 years ago, when it starts today, it burns catastrophically.

We witnessed it in the Biscuit Fire in southern Oregon a year ago. We witnessed it in the B&B fire this summer in my district. We witnessed it in California. We can see it all across America's great forests and rangelands that when there is too much fuel, the fire is nearly uncontrollable and certainly catastrophic.

Let us talk about the human consequences, because we saw it especially this year in California, but we have seen it before. Last year 23 firefighters lost their lives, and the American taxpayer spent $1.5 billion containing 2002's record fires.

This shows you a scene that, unfortunately, is one that has been seen far too often: a home that has been destroyed in a forested area. This next shot shows you what happens to fish habitat. This was in my district in eastern Oregon, a fire that took place in 1989. This is a stream that used to be part of the spring Chinook salmon habitat. You can see it is nothing but a mudflow here. There is no buffer. These are all dead trees. It looks like a moonscape or a Mars-scape. This was in the Wallowa Whitman National Forest. This is what you get when you cannot control forest fires.

This, on the other hand, is an example of how a fire that has been treated like we are talking about treating performs. This is an area where President Bush accompanied me and Senator Smith and others, Senator Wyden, up to the Squires Peak fire in 2002. And you can see where the land had been treated, there are good healthy trees left behind. There is a fire burning here, but it has fallen to the ground, because that is what happens when you treat in these areas. The fire drops to the ground, and our firefighters are able to control and contain it. The damage is not that significant. In fact, it can be very positive in terms of when a fire burns like this to regenerate.

But just on the other side of this hill where the same people who fought the fire have been doing the thinning work, it was completely obvious because they had not thinned there yet. Where they had not thinned, the fire had been in the canopy, it had been at the top. It had been catastrophic and extraordinarily destructive.

Finally, let me make this point. By streamlining this process we are going to be able to get in and do this kind of work sooner so we do not end up with that kind of devastation I showed you earlier. But we also, as a policy, as a Congress, need to take a look at what happens after a catastrophic fire. How can we get in and restore America's great conifer forests instead of letting them become brush? How do we get in and protect the habitat that remains after a fire and improve it so our fish runs can come back? That is a debate we will have to have in the future.

Today, though, I am delighted that we are at this point with a comprehensive bipartisan, bicameral plan that will move us an enormous generation forward to protect and preserve America's forests, create jobs in our rural communities, and make sure fire, when it burns, is not catastrophic.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 206) supporting the National Marrow Donor Program and other bone marrow donor programs and encouraging Americans to learn about the importance of bone marrow donation.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on the bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the House is considering House Concurrent Resolution 206 introduced by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) to recognize the important work that the National Marrow Donor Program and other bone marrow donor programs do to save lives.

Bone marrow transplants are often one of the last options available to patients struggling to fight debilitating and often terminal illnesses. Unfortunately, finding a bone marrow match is very difficult. In fact, every year nearly two-thirds of patients in need of a bone marrow transplant will not find a marrow donor match within their family and, therefore, must rely on the help of strangers.

Each month the National Bone Marrow Registry coordinates more than 150 transplants. With a diverse registry of more than 4 million potential bone marrow and cord blood donors, the National Bone Marrow Registry offers hope to thousands of patients. Just last month, the House approved H.R. 3034, the National Bone Marrow Donor Registry Reauthorization Act, to reauthorize the national bone marrow registry for an additional 5-year period.

Since 1986, the National Bone Marrow Donor Program has facilitated more than 15,000 transplants for patients. I hope the Senate will join us soon in extending this program to guarantee that thousands more will benefit. This resolution will raise awareness about the bone marrow donor programs, and will encourage more Americans to donate, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), the author of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. I think it is critically important that we do that to move this program forward.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides for major improvements in how we will manage our forests. First of all, it reduces unneeded government analysis. Second, it provides for actually more public involvement, especially in the beginning, through better notice and better participation requirements. It requires and reforms the appeals process so we can end the costly delays that do keep our professional foresters from doing the work they need to do to make our forests more healthy.

Finally, it does require the courts to more quickly move on appeals and, more importantly, consider the catastrophic affect on forest health of preventing these projects from going forward.

Now, we have heard today about the problem with the General Accounting Office, but let us talk about what the General Accounting Office actually found. This is what the GAO report found: 58 percent of eligible thinning projects in the United States were appealed in fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2002. Fifty-two percent of the eligible forest thinning projects proposed near communities in the wildland urban interface were appealed. Half the projects, half the projects right around communities were appealed. The GAO found an overwhelming number of Forest Service appeals were found to be without merit. Seventy-three percent of the appeals were rejected.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have to change the process. That is what we are doing today. We are going to fund the work that needs to be done. This year alone we are going to spend $420 million to go in and thin out our forests so we will not have catastrophic fires in the future. I would like to see this bill expanded beyond 11 percent of the forests that need this kind of treatment, but that is as far as we could get under this act. I want to see our communities protected.

This legislation relies on the underlying National Forest management plans to protect old growth forests. My colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) talks about protecting old growth. We do that in this bill because the underlying plans protect the old growth. And the alternative of defeating this bill is to have old growth forests that are blackened, burned and destroyed, and I will not stand for that. Vote for the bill.

Mr. Speaker, my parents are both gone now. They died before this Congress could act to provide prescription drug coverage for them under Medicare. So they both paid for it out of their pocket. Let us talk about what this bill would do for those who survive. The agreement would provide 514,456 Oregonian seniors with access to a Medicare prescription drug benefit for the first time in the history of this program. Beginning in 2006, there would be 129,000 Medicare individuals in Oregon who would have access to drug coverage they would not otherwise have, and it will improve it for many more. They will get a $600 card if you are in the lower-income level of $12,000 a year. Couples who make $16,000 a year who lack prescription drug coverage today would be given $600 in annual assistance to help them afford their medicines along with the discount card of 15 to 25 percent. That is a total of $92 million for Oregon seniors that would help 76,000 of them be able to pay for their drugs in 2004 and 2005.

There are 151,000 seniors in Oregon who have limited savings and low incomes who will qualify for even more generous coverage. They will pay no premium, no deductible for their prescription drug coverage, and they will just be responsible for a minimal copayment. They will get the coverage. If you are low income under this plan, they get the coverage. Perhaps that is part of why the Portland Oregonian has endorsed this program. More importantly, my State like many has faced some fairly difficult fiscal challenges. I was there when we implemented the Oregon health plan and helped put it into place. Today because of the fiscal challenges, they are having to cut people off of Medicaid in Oregon. This plan over 8 years will return $279 million by having Medicare pick up the cost of those senior low-income people.

This is a balanced plan that will help our seniors get the prescription drug coverage they need. We ought to enact it.

Mr. Speaker, I regrettably come to the floor in opposition to the Interior conference report that my friend from North Carolina and the Chairman of the Subcommittee, Mr. Taylor, worked so hard in putting together. There are many things in this conference report for which I'm very grateful. I'm grateful to the Chairman for working with me to give the Bureau of Indian Affairs the authority to fund the first phase of the recommendations from the Chiloquin dam study, a critical effort in the Klamath Basin of southern Oregon to improve endangered sucker fish habitat and lighten the burden on agriculture. I also want to extend my sincere appreciation to the Chairman for funding PILT at $227,500,000--one of its highest levels ever. While it is not the fully authorized level of $360 million that I have been a staunch advocate for, it's much better than it has been in the past and the good Chairman and his top-notch staff are to thank for this. Finally, I want to commend the Chairman for his work in getting $400 million included in the conference report to replenish the exhausted fire suppression accounts of the BLM and Forest Service, and I commend him for including almost $2.5 billion to implement the National fire plan next year. These are significant accomplishments and I have enthusiastically supported them.

However, even with the inclusion of all these excellent provisions, I reluctantly must vote against the conference report because of the language included that undermines the efforts of my friend from California, the Chairman of the Resources Committee, to find a legislative solution to the complicated problem of tribal trust accounting. The language added to the conference report would interrupt the Department of the Interior's conduct of its historical accounting of individual Indian trust fund accounts, which is mandated by federal court order in Cobell v. Norton. The language would suspend any such accounting until either December 31, 2004 or until Congress revised the American Indian Trust Management Reform Act to limit this forensic accounting activity. The added language not only interferes with a court-required accounting for hundreds of thousands of Native Americans, but also seeks to force a potentially hasty decision on an exceptionally complex issue and overlooks an agreement reached between Chairman Pombo and Chairman Taylor during House floor consideration of this bill in July. That agreement stated that settlement of the Cobell matter would be left to Chairman Pombo's Resources Committee to resolve, the proper authorizing committee venue. Unfortunately, the conference report language does not comport with that agreement, and so I will reluctantly vote against this bill in its current form. I am hopeful that this provision can successfully be resolved in the correct legislative forum, and that the many other outstanding provisions of the Interior Appropriations bill developed under the fine leadership of Chairman Taylor remain intact.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to commend my colleague from Texas for offering this motion to instruct. I think it is a valid one. I think it is an important one. I concur with his comments about the need to conduct this discussion in open and in a conference. It is probably misplaced in that where it really needs to be put is to our fellows and ladies on the other side of the Chamber in the sense that we need them to come to the conference. I think we have a reputation in the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Resources, as we have heard, about in the importance of working together, debating these issues, coming to closure in a fair and aboveboard and open way.

I want to point out too that when it comes to the issue of hazardous fuels reduction, we have heard a lot about how the Senate bill provides a $750 million a year authorization, and, indeed, we know that authorization is important. What we never hear is the fact that in the underlying law, the law already on the books that provides for the national fire plan, there is already an authorization that provides for such sums as may be necessary to be spent for hazardous fuels work.

So in other words, the Department of Forestry and the Department of Interior both have the authority already under existing law to spend whatever sums are necessary that can be appropriated by this Congress to do the kind of work that we are talking about needs to be done. And in fact, in the last 5 years we have quadrupled in the Congress the spending on hazardous fuels work, recognizing the importance of doing this work. But so much more has to be done out there if we are going to prevent the kinds of catastrophic fires we saw in California this year, that we have seen in Oregon year after year, and to get in and clean up these forests, to get the brush out, to get the ladder fuels out, so that we can have healthy forests, green forests, not black ones, so people are not forced to evacuate and lose everything that they have spent a lifetime trying to create around their homes, so that we can protect communities.

There are some issues in the Senate bill I have some disagreements with. They tripled the size of the bill, first of all, from 51 pages to 153 pages. Now, there are some editorial writers supporting the Senate bill, telling us in the House we had to adopt it before the Senate even finished amending it, which is kind of ironic. They have added protection for ginseng and Green Mountain National Forest Boundary and a prohibition on cock fighting, and Karst conservation in Puerto Rico, some things that are not normally considered prime topics when it comes to hazardous fuels reductions in Federal forests. I mean, I do not know what ginseng labeling has to do with hazardous forests, but we are dealing with the other body here, and we will accommodate them to the best of our ability. But our focus has to be on making sure we solve the procedural problems. In some of the hazardous fuels reductions projects the Members have heard about in my State today from my colleague, what was not mentioned was the fact that some of those very projects were appealed by groups while those places were burning this summer. The audacity. These groups are actually appealing a hazardous fuels project on the same day part of that proposed hazardous fuels project was burning. This is how out of control the appeals process is. This is why this legislation is so critical, and why we need to go to conference and act swiftly to pass it.

I thank the chairman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to pay special tribute to a fine American, a true gentleman and a good friend of mine, Mr. Bob Skinner, Jr. of Oregon on the occasion of the end of his term as president of the Oregon Cattlemen's Association (OCA). Bob is a fifth generation cattle rancher, raised on the high desert of southeast Oregon. Growing up on his family's ranch outside of the small town of Jordan Valley, Bob learned the virtues of hard work, patience, and dependability. After earning a B.S. degree in business from the College of Idaho, Bob's devotion to his family and friends and his affinity for the ranching way of life drew him home to Jordan Valley and Oregon's vast high desert landscapes.

Through his many efforts over the years, Bob has emerged as a powerful spokesman for family ranchers and the rural way of life both in Oregon and across the nation. During the early 1990's, he led the effort to organize his neighbors in defense of grazing rights along the Owyhee River following an attempt to eliminate grazing as a critical land management tool. In the late 1990's after the Steens Mountain was proposed as a national monument Bob teamed up with other ranchers, community leaders and me to find a solution that would ensure the sustainability of livestock production on the mountain while preserving treasured resources. Bob was critical to the establishment of the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area, which arose from legislation I introduced in Congress--one of the most widely applauded measures to affect eastern Oregon in decades.

Mr. Speaker, Bob enjoys a reputation as a clear, cool head in discussions pertaining to the cattle industry. He is effective precisely because of his ability to maintain a levelheaded and respectful demeanor while tenaciously fighting for the interests of family ranchers. Bob's quiet, articulate and effective leadership has earned him the respect of many in Oregon and throughout the West. Bob understands that we can preserve the ranching lifestyle and stand up for the hard-working people who make their living off the land while improving the environment. Ranchers are, in fact, true stewards of the land and have been for many generations.

Bob has been recognized for his leadership with a number of prestigious awards, among them the 1997 Voice of the Industry Award of the Portland Chamber Agriculture Industries Committee and the 2000 Salem Chamber Agriculture Star Award. Over the years, Bob has given back generously to his community by donating his time and energy to various worthy causes. He has served on numerous local boards ranging from the county road board to

the local ambulance board. Bob has also devoted much of his time to the young people of Malheur County as a 4-H leader. He further shares both his love of flying and his Cessna 182 to provide transportation for search and rescue personnel. I am proud to call Bob Skinner, Jr. my good friend and appreciate the opportunity to share his accomplishments over his long and distinguished career as an Oregon cattle rancher. The cattle industry and future generations of farmers and ranchers will continue to benefit from Bob's dedication and willingness to go the extra mile on their behalf.

I would be remiss if I failed to note Bob's remarkable family and all that they mean to him. Bob's father, Bob Skinner, Sr. is an equally impressive man. He resides in Jordan Valley, too, and has a distinguished leadership background similar to his son's. Bob Sr. was a former national committee member of the Public Lands Council and a Past President of Oregon Cattlemen's Association. I am fortunate to call Bob Sr. and his wonderful wife Sara my good friends. Bob Jr.'s wife, Karen, is likewise deserving of considerable praise. She is Bob's partner in success and travels great distances to dedicate herself to her community and industry. Together Bob and Karen have raised four children, Robbin, Kimberly, Silas, and Michael, who have given the Skinners six beloved grandchildren, Nicholous, Kirk and Birch, Kasen, Regann, and Kort. In the summer of 2002, I had the privilege of spending the night in Jordan Valley with the entire family and had a wonderful time getting to know the extended Skinner clan. Together they truly exemplify the dedicated, hard-working and fun-loving American family.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating this extraordinary man and great American, Bob Skinner, Jr. I would like to thank Bob personally for all he has done for the people of Malheur County, the Second District, and the State of Oregon--especially those Westerners who make their living off the land. I wish Bob, his wife Karen and their entire family all the best in future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Glen Stonebrink, on the occasion of his retirement. During his long and distinguished career, Glen has committed his energy and efforts to making both his community and the State of Oregon better places to live. Glen's accomplishments range from educating our young people to advocating on behalf of rural Americans, two pursuits that he has approached with selfless dedication. His commitment, spirit and devotion to his fellow citizens have been his most defining trait over the years, and I am proud to call Glen and his wonderful wife, Loydee, my friends.

As a high school teacher at Yamhill Carlton High School and then as a college professor at Linfield College, Glen devoted his energy and talent to training a new generation of Oregonians in math, physics, and computer science. It is perhaps Glen's dedication and devotion to the young people he instructed that will serve as his most enduring legacy.

As many of my colleagues know, the West is known for its stunning natural beauty, fertile soil and lush timberlands. We owe a debt of gratitude to those individuals who devote themselves to protecting our national treasures while preserving the farming and ranching way of life for future generations. Growing up on his family's wheat and cattle ranch in the high country of Wallowa County, Glen learned firsthand the importance of balancing these interests while working to protect the values of rural Oregonians.

Glen's real world understanding and education in natural resource issues led to his appointment under both the Reagan and Bush Administrations as the State Executive Director for the Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation Service, now known as the Farm Service Agency. In this prestigious position he had the opportunity to help preserve and promote American agriculture while working with farmers to implement programs to conserve land and water resources.

After his term as State Executive Director of the Oregon Farm Services Agency, Glen brought his knowledge of the West to Washington, D.C., where he worked as the Legislative Director for Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth of Idaho. During his tenure working on Capitol Hill, my staff worked closely with him on a number of issues impacting the cattle and ranching industry.

For the last six years, Glen has served as the Executive Director of the Oregon Cattlemen's Association, working to protect the ranching way of life. Glen has been a tireless advocate for rural issues ranging from private property rights to water rights. He is also called upon frequently to advise groups on natural resource issues and provide assistance in working with the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating Glen Stonebrink on the many achievements that mark his long and impressive career. I am grateful for all that he has done on behalf of the people of Oregon and the people of the rural West. I wish Glen, Loydee and their entire family all the best in their future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3249-- a bill I introduced with my colleague from Oregon, Mr. DeFazio, which would extend the term of the Forest Counties Payments Committee. I want to commend the chairman of the Resources Committee, Mr. Pombo, and the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee, Mr. Goodlatte, for expediting the consideration of this legislation in their respective committees.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 3249 would extend the term of the Forest Counties Payments Committee to coincide with the sunset of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, which expires on September 30, 2007. The committee was created in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill and is comprised of local government county and school officials. Its purpose was to develop long-term solutions to ensure the proper management of our national forests, emphasizing forest health and economic activity, and evaluate the effectiveness of the County Schools legislation.

Congress charged the committee with evaluating several key areas in making its recommendations. They include the methods by which payments are made to eligible states and counties; the impact of revenues from historical multiple use of federal lands on states and counties; the economic environmental, and social benefits of federal lands to counties and reviewing the costs to counties resulting from the presence of federal lands. The committee held at least six listening sessions throughout the country to understand better the impact that the presence of these federal lands has on counties where they are located. The input gathered from these listening sessions was ultimately used to write the committee's report, which was published in February 2003.

What did the committee's report find? It found what many communities in my district have known for at least the last decade: that the decline in timber receipts from federal lands has had a devastating economic impact on these rural communities. While communities acknowledge the benefits associated with the presence of public lands within their counties, including improved quality of life, recreational opportunities, and the revenue coming into their communities through travel and tourism, the committee validated the claims that these benefits are outweighed by the degradation of county roads and schools that has resulted from the decline in timber receipts. This not only creates access issues for individuals wishing to recreate on public lands, but also creates safety concerns for transporting children to schools, responding to emergencies and day-to-day travel.

This unfortunate reality especially holds true in the counties I represent in eastern Oregon. Between 1990-1999 the counties in this region saw Forest Service payments from timber receipts and other generated revenues drop by 87 percent.

In light of the rapid decline of timber receipts reaching these communities, Congress passed the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. This act stabilized timber revenue dependent counties by providing a temporary ``safety-net'' payment to forest counties and schools at 85 percent of the average of their three highest receipt years from 1986-1999. The legislation also provided an additional 15 percent to support community-based projects, like hazardous fuels treatments taking place on federal lands.

Madam Speaker, the authorization for the Forest Counties Payments Committee expired several weeks ago, on October 11, before it was able to examine fully the impact of the

County Schools legislation. More importantly, if the committee's term is not extended, it will not have the opportunity to examine the potential effect that the implementation of the National Fire Plan or the Healthy Forests Initiative will have on America's forested counties. The Chairman of this committee, Mark Evans, stated in a letter to Chairman Pombo, ``. . . the Committee did not have adequate time to consider ways to integrate the Healthy Forests Initiative and National Fire Plan with future payment options. The timing of development of these two programs along with a 18-month timeframe imposed on the Committee to produce a final report precluded full consideration of possible options.''

Madam Speaker, I agree wholeheartedly with the remarks of Chairman Evans. We need to pass this legislation to allow the Payments Committee to continue its good work. It goes without saying that its future findings will lay the foundation as we move towards the reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act.

I'd like to once again thank the efforts of Chairman Pombo and Chairman Goodlatte in getting this legislation to the floor in an expeditious fashion. I urge the House to adopt this extension and yield back the balance of my time.