Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, a great South Carolinian, in fact a great American, William Bryan Jennings Dorn, passed away at the age of 89 on August 13, 2005. He represented the citizens of my district from 1947 to 1974, 13 terms, 26 years.

His list of accomplishments is long and impressive. Before coming to DC, he served as the youngest member of both the South Carolina House and the Senate, and was a proud veteran of World War II. During his service here on Capitol Hill, Dorn became chairman of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, and a strong advocate of military personnel. He worked on several

pieces of legislation, primarily the GI bill, which has enabled countless veterans to get a college education.

On a more personal note, before he died I had an opportunity to spend some time with Representative Dorn and his family, a memory I will always cherish.

To the Dorn family, our prayers are with you as you grieve, and I thank you for sharing such a man of integrity with us.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 300) recognizing the South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company on the occasion of its 50th anniversary and saluting the outstanding service of the Company to the people of South Carolina.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to include extraneous material thereon.

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

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from my home State of South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) for introducing this measure.

The South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company motto is ``Helping you is what we do best.'' They have been committed to that motto for the past five decades. During that time, the company has grown from serving South Carolina's agricultural community to becoming the State's largest domestic insurer. Today we recognize the company's accomplishment of providing outstanding service to the people of South Carolina for the past 50 years.

As a coastal State, South Carolina has received its fair share of severe storms. When Hurricane Hugo devastating our State in 1989, the South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company was there to pick up the pieces, paying out more than $71 million in claims. Ten years later Hurricane Floyd slammed into our coast, and the company once again did a remarkable job helping us recover, settling 90 percent of its reported claims within 1 week.

Madam Speaker, the South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company has helped many South Carolinians through difficult times. It is no wonder the company received an excellent rating from the world's leading insurance rating agency.

Again let me thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) for introducing this measure on behalf of the South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), the author of the resolution and a genuine friend of the farm bureau.

Madam Speaker, I want to close in saying I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) for being the author of the resolution. There is no doubt that the South Carolina Farm Bureau Insurance Corporation has had a fantastic effect on every segment of South Carolina life. I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 300.

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

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Bo Horne lives with his wife in Seneca, South Carolina, where they operate a small business from their home. It is their piece of the American dream.

In 1997, they sold a computer software license to a customer in New Jersey for $695, and even though Mr. Horne has no employees or no real property in New Jersey, this one-time sale triggers a New Jersey State law requiring Mr. Horne to pay $600 in taxes and fees every year on the software as long as it remains in use. This tax is stifling to small business investments and entrepreneurs across the country.

Mr. Horne stated yesterday in his testimony before the House Committee on the Judiciary that he is speaking up because of thousands of small businesses that are totally unaware of the risks. Mr. Horne also highlighted a commonsense bill that I am a proud cosponsor of, H.R. 1956, the Business Activity Tax Simplification Act, as introduced by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte). It protects small businesses by requiring them to be physically present in the State before they are subject to taxes by the State.

I urge my colleagues to stand up for small businesses by supporting this important legislation, and I thank Mr. Horne for his hard work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong support for President Bush's nominee for Chief Justice, Judge John Roberts, Jr., who started his confirmation hearings in the Senate this week.

Fortunately, Judge Roberts has been applauded through editorial boards throughout the Nation, including some papers in my State. In fact, the Greenville News said: ``It is fitting that Rehnquist's brilliant law clerk, Judge Roberts, a man seemingly cut from the same judicial cloth, was nominated Monday by President Bush to become the Nation's 17th Chief Justice, and a man of integrity and fairness.''

Mr. Speaker, Judge Roberts is the kind of judge this country needs. He will apply the law as written and decide each case on its merits regardless of his political views. Republicans and Democrats alike have acknowledged Judge Roberts' outstanding career. Democratic lawyers Lloyd Cutler and Seth Waxman and former Republican House Counsel C. Boyden Gray have cited his unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness in praising him.

Judge Roberts is the right man for the job, and I strongly support his speedy confirmation.

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

We have talked about a lot of different issues tonight. Let me tell you what it is all about, how it hit home with me. Stephen Felker, Avondale Mills, Graniteville, South Carolina, textile manufacturer, asked me to coming down Monday to his factory to look around, and we did. We had a wonderful tour. He showed us around, and I was on the floor taking a tour and happened to see a gentleman behind one of the weaver machines. Roosevelt Mims. This was not a staged event or anything like that. I just happened to see Roosevelt behind the weaver there.

I walked up to him and said, I am Congressman Barrett. What is your name? He said, Roosevelt Mims. I said, Roosevelt, how long have you been working with Avondale Mills? He said, 36 years. His supervisor came over and whispered in my ear, he said, 36 years, Congressman, perfect attendance.

Roosevelt Mims is the heart and soul of this whole debate, a textile worker in Graniteville, South Carolina; a textile worker in Graniteville, South Carolina that a good CAFTA is going to save.

I do not know about you, but at the end of this debate, I am going to vote for CAFTA. I am going to vote for Roosevelt Mims, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 3283, the United States Trade Rights Enforcement Act.

Madam Speaker, this bill goes to the heart of what we know is true in South Carolina: China cheats. I thank President Bush and the administration for stepping up their trade enforcements this year, and I especially commend them for expediting the implementation of the Chinese textile safeguards to combat recent surges in exports to our market, but when it comes to China, more must be done.

The United States Trade Rights Enforcement Act would provide the necessary tools to ensure China meets the trade obligations it has agreed to in order to become a member of the WTO. In addition, it holds in this legislation that China will be accountable. It is common sense to say here is what they have agreed to, and if they do not follow through, there will be consequences.

How we deal with China today affects our future, our jobs and our livelihood. That is why I urge all my colleagues to level the playing field for everybody and support H.R. 3283.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, in recent days and weeks, some have suggested we need a specific timeline or a date that indicates when our troops will begin to withdraw from Iraq.

I would like to read an e-mail that one of my staffers received a few weeks ago from a friend currently serving in Iraq. The major says, ``I know there are growing doubts, questions, and concerns by many regarding our presence here and how long we are going to stay. For what it is worth, the attachment hopefully tells you why we are trying to make a positive difference for the future of this country.''

This is the attachment right here. Mr. Chairman, a picture truly does speak a thousand words.

He went on to end his e-mail by saying, ``I hope to head home in 80 days

with the feeling that I contributed something and made this world'' not Iraq, but ``made this world a better place for these guys.''

Look at this. This is what it is all about. To quote Prime Minister Singh who was on this very floor yesterday, he said, ``We must fight terrorism wherever it exists because terrorism anywhere threatens democracy everywhere.''

Mr. Chairman, any date for withdrawal would be arbitrary. We must allow our plan to go forward and not abandon it halfway through. It is not about their future; it is about our future.

Let us not talk about an exit strategy, let us talk about winning, let us talk about freedom, let us talk about victory. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Ros-Lehtinen amendment.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to my attention that one of my votes yesterday, Thursday, June 23, 2005, was not recorded by the electronic device.

I ask that the Record reflect that I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall vote #307 (On Agreeing to the Bradley Amendment to H.R. 3010).

Madam Speaker, we have been talking a lot about Iraq, and a lot of people have different ideas and different thoughts about what we are doing over there. In recent days and weeks, some have suggested we need a specific timeline or date that indicates when our troops will begin to withdraw from Iraq.

I would like to read an e-mail that one of my staffers received at the end of last week from a friend of hers currently serving in Iraq. The soldier says: ``I know there are growing doubts, questions and concerns by many regarding our presence here and how long we should stay. For what it is worth, the attachment hopefully tells you why we are trying to make a positive difference in this country's future.''

This is the attachment, Madam Speaker, and a picture truly is worth 1,000 words.

The soldier went on to say in ending his e-mail: ``I hope to head home in 80 days with a feeling that I contributed something and made this world a better place for these guys.''

Madam Speaker, any date for withdrawal would be arbitrary. We must allow our plan to go forward and not abandon it halfway through. This is not just about their future, it is about the future of all of us. Let us not talk about an exit strategy; let us talk about victory.

Mr. Speaker, due to family obligations in South Carolina, I unfortunately missed recorded votes on the House floor on Monday, May 23, 2005.

I ask that the Record reflect that had I been able to vote that day, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 200 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 744--Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of 2005), ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 201 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 29--Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act), and ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 202 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H. Con. Res. 149--Recognizing the 57th Anniversary of the independence of the State of Israel).

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Hobson for his leadership in bringing this important legislation to the floor, and I also thank him for his continued commitment to the Yucca Mountain project. As a fiscal conservative, I share his concerns regarding the federal government's liability as result of project delays, and I would like to work with the Committee to ensure the Department of Energy (DOE) fulfills its statutory and contractual obligation to accept spent fuel for disposal. To resolve this issue the Committee has recommended the Spent Fuel Recycling Initiative (Initiative), which links interim storage to reprocessing.

I strongly believe interim storage of commercial spent fuel should not take place a DOE sites like Savannah River. However, I do agree that interim storage is an issue Congress and the DOE should examine. One argument posed by opponents of this Initiative is that interim storage would create a ``de facto'' permanent repository, which undermines our national policy of disposing high-level radioactive waste in a permanent deep, geologic repository. While I share the concern, this argument only has merit if interim storage is dealt with as a separate issue. But, the Committee's report expressly states the Initiative has ``linked'' interim storage to reprocessing. Moreover, this bill fully funds the Yucca Mountain project. These facts read together clearly imply that the DOE implementation of the Initiative's core elements should not undermine Yucca Mountain. As a result, I strongly believe the DOE should carefully examine any unintended consequences in its implementation report to ensure the Initiative supports our national policy on nuclear waste disposal as set forth by the Nuclear Waste Disposal Act.

Examining the merits of this Initiative also requires us to review its other core element--reprocessing commercial spent fuel. The Committee correctly notes prior to the mid-1970's, the Federal government encouraged the reprocessing of commercial spent fuel and even developed reprocessing facilities in several states including South Carolina. Although opponents often cite proliferation concerns as a reason not to reprocess spent fuel, the report states ``there is no evidence that current [European] reprocessing operations pose a significant proliferation risk.'' Equally as important, I agree with the Committee that reduced volumes gained through reprocessing could avert the need to expand Yucca or site a second repository. Finally, reprocessing can also reduce the radiotoxicity of high-level waste, which makes licensing Yucca Mountain a simpler proposition. As a result, there is no question it is time for our nation to reexamine this issue, and I believe the Savannah River Site's existing reprocessing infrastructure should be considered as potential resources that could be utilized for this purpose.

Although I agree the Committee's Initiative presents our nation a possible solution to finally shipping high-level waste out of states like South Carolina more quickly than anticipated, I do not believe the Initiative could be implemented without further Congressional authorization. Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA), the DOE's authority to store commercial spent fuel on an interim basis at existing DOE facilities expired January 1, 1990. Moreover, the NWPA does not allow the DOE to construct a Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility until Yucca Mountain receives a construction license. Thus, if the DOE desires to implement the core elements of the Initiative, I along with the Committee request the DOE provide to Congress any necessary authority it may need to execute it.

I have no doubt Chairman Hobson's intentions with this Initiative are to support the nuclear power industry by ensuring we have a permanent repository for commercial spent fuel, and he is to be commended for bringing this matter to the 109th Congress' attention. The issue of nuclear waste disposal is complex, and it will require big ideas for safe disposition of our high-level waste. The Spent Fuel Recycling Initiative is one of those ideas, and I look forward to working with my colleagues and my constituents to ensure it is the best policy to pursue.

Mr. Speaker, this issue is more than facts and figures. For me it is personal. It is about my children, Madison, Jeb and Ross Barrett. It is about my nieces and my nephews, Hayden and English and Jason and Andrew. They are not just names, they are living, breathing human beings. They are people I care about, they are people I love. It is my family. And they began life as an embryo.

Let us be clear, embryonic stem cell research is completely legal. What we are talking about today is whether taxpayer dollars should be used to destroy potential life, and, for me, life must supersede all other considerations, especially for the purpose of medical experimentation.

Life is so precious, Mr. Speaker, and as long as I am a United States Congressman, I will do everything I can to protect it.

Mr. Speaker, due to obligations in South Carolina, I unfortunately missed recorded votes on the House floor on Monday, May 16, 2005.

I ask that the Record reflect that had I been able to vote that day, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 171 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 627--Linda White-Epps Post Office), ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 172 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H. Res. 266--Peace Officers Memorial Day), and ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 173 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 2107--National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Maintenance Fund).

Mr. Speaker, due to other obligations, I unfortunately missed a recorded vote on the House floor on Thursday, April 28, 2005.

I ask that the Record reflect that had I been able to vote that day, I would have voted ``yes'' on Rollcall vote No. 150 (Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H. Res. 210--Supporting the goals of World Intellectual Property Day, and recognizing the importance of intellectual property in the United States and worldwide).

Mr. Speaker, the first 100 days of the 109th Congress have been very successful, but there is still a lot of work we have got to do. One item at the top of the list is our need to strengthen Social Security. I was honored to accompany President Bush to my home State of South Carolina as he addressed the general assembly regarding the issue of Social Security. I have found that for the most part people understand that Social Security is safe for today's seniors and those nearing retirement, but is still very dangerous for our younger workers; and they know the facts as they relate to the problem.

What they want is for Congress to present clear and concise ideas on a permanent fix. I look forward to working with my colleagues toward a solution in the coming weeks and months to fix once and for all the Social Security system. The time is now. The opportunity is now. The future is now.