Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

On behalf of the leadership, let me try to respond. The gentleman's description of the schedule this evening is exactly on target, and it is our intention, the leadership's intention, to come to the Floor at 10 o'clock in the morning. This bill will be up and the committee's work will be done before we proceed to anything else. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield further. The gentleman and I discussed this earlier. On behalf of the leadership, they have given me direction to publicly outline that agreement. We will be coming in at 10 o'clock in the morning. Our bill will be completed before we proceed to any other matters.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, we will accept the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate my colleague yielding.

Indeed, this issue was discussed extensively in our full committee. There is little doubt that the committee, in a totally nonpartisan way, is interested in sending this message; and we are laying the foundation here to reflect the reality that America is at its best when we express ourselves overseas in as close to a bipartisan way as possible.

I must compliment the gentleman for his own statement at this time, but also in the full committee. I think we laid the foundation to let people in the Middle East know how serious we are about a clear message, and this message will be carried forward to the conference with other body as well.

So I appreciate my colleague yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I am not rising because it happens to be my 19th wedding anniversary.

Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege to express my great appreciation for the fantastic work done by the chairman and the ranking member on this bill, and for all of us to come together to recognize the birthday of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).

I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.

Let us all join in extending happy birthday wishes to the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate my chairman yielding. I rise just for a moment.

As you know, over the years in the Committee on Appropriations. I have not had the chance to serve on the gentleman's great subcommittee. Since I have the job chairing the whole committee now, I have involved myself in the gentleman's work; and I must say to my colleagues, our Members, as well as the public-at-large, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) over the years have done a fabulous job, especially this year in a year of some constraint.

We may have to come up with some money for a sound system for ourselves.

Mr. Chairman, I just want my colleagues to know how impressed I am with the work both the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) have done on behalf of the American public, whether it be Indian health care, or preschool, or dealing with labor issues that can be very contentious, a fabulous job of priorities.

I particularly want to compliment the gentleman for the priority he has given to the kind of research and development that is extending the good health as well as the lives of our citizens. I have been very impressed with those people from NIH but also from the Centers for Disease Control, fabulously involving America in the most important work; that is, healthy lives and longer lives for our citizens. I compliment the gentleman and thank him very much for the time.

Mr. Chairman, it is a privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the point that is being made. I think the listening public, the interested public, should know that the Federal funding for programs like Sesame Street, the popular children's programs, frankly only 2.5 percent of that comes from the Federal Government. Indeed, the billionaire could clearly take care of that.

And one more point. For all those people who are calling our offices from San Francisco and New York and otherwise across the country, if each would just send another dollar, they would not have to bother with this; they would save that in the phone bills.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from San Diego for his bringing this item to our attention. I also thank very much the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

There is no doubt that the committee is very interested in this challenge. We intend to take their message to the conference and look forward to working with them and doing everything that is possible in the conference agreement.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the debate on this amendment and any amendment thereto be limited to 10 minutes to be equally divided and controlled by the proponent and myself, the opponent.

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

Let me say to the gentlewoman, I am very empathetic to the question that she is raising. I must say that at this moment the committee is quite anxious to see us go forward with the funding in the VERB program, to measure further its effectiveness.

We are very empathetic to that which the gentlewoman is discussing, and we do intend to raise this question with the Senate. It is not an issue that will go undiscussed, and I am very hopeful as we will go forward that we will be able to be responsive to the gentlewoman's request.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

I have every reason to believe that we will be able to address it in conference.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) bringing this to our attention. The gentleman knows the difficulty we are facing in terms of funding overall, but it was very significant that the gentleman brought this matter to the committee's attention, and your advocacy is going to be very helpful to us as we go to conference.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2985, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

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

The legislative branch bill, Mr. Chairman, provides for $2.870 billion, an increase of only 1.7 percent over the fiscal year 2005. The bill represents a $270 million reduction from the budget request.

Mr. Chairman, although we did not agree on every item on this bill, we worked very closely with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) to produce a bipartisan bill for the legislative branch. I want to thank all the committee members for their contributions in putting this bill together.

While small in size, this is the bill that funds the work of the Congress, and it is a bill that we all can be very proud of.

The bill includes funding for the operations of the House and several joint items, the Capitol Police, the Compliance Board, the Congressional Budget Office, the Architect of the Capitol, the Library of Congress, the Government Printing Office, the General Accountability Office, and the Open World Leadership Program.

There will be no reductions in the current workforce.

The bill provides for all personnel cost-of-living increases and all other pay-related costs.

The bill also was reported out of the full committee on a voice vote.

The Capitol Visitor Center is funded at the cost-to-complete level of $36.9 million. The bill does not include funding for CVC operating expenses.

The bill establishes an Inspector General for the Capitol Police. The bill terminates the mounted horse unit and transfers the horses and equipment to the U.S. Park Service.

As part of an amendment in the full committee, I offered, and the committee adopted, the Continuity in Representation Act at the Speaker's request. This bill has passed the House twice, and just recently, the vote in March was 329 to 68.

Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill and one that benefits the entire legislative branch. Ultimately, this is the bill that reflects the work of the House. We are all in this together, Mr. Chairman, and because of that, I feel very strongly that this legislation should have the support of the entire House.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN05.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN05.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN05.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH22JN05.004

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood).

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

I appreciate very much the gentleman having this colloquy with me and raising this important issue. As we have discussed, the smoking policy in the House office buildings is under the jurisdiction of the House Office Building Commission. That commission is made up of leaders on both sides of the aisle; and, frankly, I am very hesitant to interfere with their responsibility or their work. But I think it is very important that the gentleman is raising this issue today, and I am happy to have this discussion with him.

I would be very happy to join with the gentleman in that discussion. I think I probably will discuss it with my wife as well; but in the meantime, you and I work together on the committee, and I am happy to work with you on almost any issue you might raise.

Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).

If the gentleman will yield, I would be pleased to do so.

Mr. Chairman, let me tell the gentleman that I am very appreciative of his interest in the institution's history. As he is aware, the Speaker controls the placement of plaques on the House side of the Capitol. Their placement is very restricted, and we attempt to achieve recognition of events and places normally through other means.

The Capitol Visitors Center is being designed to provide our visitors with a much fuller understanding and history of the House and Senate. Included in the CVC is a 16,000 square-foot exhibit hall. In this exhibit hall, the architectural and legislative history of the institution are highlighted.

As part of the currently proposed CVC exhibits are detailed sections on the history of the Capitol and included in this is the fact that when the Capitol was originally built, it was used for more than legislative meetings. It was commonly used as the community center for the citizens of Washington, D.C. During that time, there were few places for meetings or church services. Thus, it is correct that such religious services were held here.

All these facts are included in the CVC exhibits, and I would encourage that the education of citizens be pursued in this venue so that a more complete history beyond a plaque can be presented.

There have been, and I very much appreciate the gentleman's interest in this matter. He and I will be pursuing it as we go forward in the months and, indeed, the years ahead.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I must say I understand the points that the gentleman is making. I believe he has a constitutional amendment that proposes an alternative approach. I must say the Speaker has been most concerned, and he asked me to put this in this bill, because a constitutional amendment takes so long to accomplish. We could be out there for Lord knows how long if it is ever accomplished. In the meantime, he has a proposal that will go forward and will be altered significantly as we go forward in order to expedite the process. That is what the Speaker is asking us to do here.

Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield further, he does have a constitutional amendment proposed. He knows how long and how risky constitutional proposals are. They hardly ever happen. And, therefore, the Speaker wants to make sure this proposal goes forward, and that is what we are suggesting.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. Chairman, I rise to yield time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier); but before doing so, I just want to mention that the previous speaker had a constitutional amendment regarding the issue of continuity in the last Congress, and on that constitutional amendment the vote was 63 yeas and 353 nays. To say the least, the constitutional approach is difficult.

Mr. Chairman, I am glad to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.

Mr. Chairman, it was not my intention to speak in these closing moments.

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I think it is important for the public to know that all of us are concerned about continuity of government in the event of a tragedy. We certainly would not be having this discussion if it had not been for 9/11.

But, indeed, there are differences in the approach that one might take. Some prefer a constitutional amendment; and yet we have tried that on more than one occasion. We have had the debate, and very few in this House have supported that proposition. So the Speaker has asked us to go forward with an idea that will be worked on carefully between now and the time we finish our work with the Senate.

But from that point forward, let me talk a bit about the Capitol Visitors Center. My colleague, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), and I, early on in this Congress, were not active supporters of a CVC. But, indeed, his leadership and my leadership, at a higher pay grade, made a different decision; so we are carrying forward their work in this process.

I have looked at the visitors center very carefully. It is rather a fabulous addition to the Capitol, the greatest addition that has been made in this century, I believe. Indeed, within the mix of that, while I might change some things, I prefer not to suggest what the details ought to be that the Architect moves forward with. I am critical of the Architect; but in the meantime, I am not one. Therefore, we are going to add this major change whereby visitors can enter the Capitol, and it will have a very significant piece of our future history in the Capitol complex. It is going to be a fabulous addition. Indeed, it will be a very high-quality addition that we will all be proud of, but I think it would be a mistake for me to try to be the architect between now and then.

So with that, Mr. Chairman, this has been a very interesting debate about the work of the people's House. I am very happy to participate in this with my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, and I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) control 2\1/2\ minutes of that time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I consider myself to be a horse person. As a matter of fact, at one time in my life I thought I might be a veterinarian because I loved horses and ducks so much. In the meantime, I watch them parade around the Capitol, and I have wondered from time to time about their relative value. The GAO has cited that the Capitol Police have difficulty quantifying the benefit the unit provides. GAO was not able to substantiate the claim of one horse doing the work of 10 people.

I do not see how the elimination of five horses is going to impact the patrol. We have scout cars, motorcycles, and mountain bikes all patrolling the same area. The real point is here I was concerned about the horses myself, but when the staff came up with the thought that perhaps we could transfer them to the Park Service and make sure they are well taken care of and used for meaningful activity, I felt very comfortable with this change. So, frankly, I think we ought to proceed with the language that is in the bill.

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

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

I found one other reason to love the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis). Her caring for horses as much as I do is a thrill to me. The problem is I have studied this material

and cannot find that this is the best way to use our funding, especially when these horses will have a new home where they might be used more effectively.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood).

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to yield 2\1/2\ minutes of that time to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for purposes of control.

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

Mr. Chairman, the fiscal year 2006 appropriations has been held at the fiscal year 2005 level. This is a decrease of $2.5 million below the 2004 level.

The Record is distributed in accordance with title 44, chapter 9 of the U.S. Code; and within that there are 3,000 copies that go to Members, of the House and Senate, 153 copies to the Library of Congress, et cetera. I can provide the balance of this in the Record.

3,018 copies to Members, House 1,479 copies, Senate 1,539 copies; 153 copies to the Library of Congress; 754 copies to public agencies and institutions designated by Senators; 698 copies to Federal agencies that pay for the copies; 521 copies to subsribers who pay for the copies; 692 copies to Federal Depository libraries nationwide.

I would say to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), that it is my feeling that an amendment like this where people are kind of reacting to the Congressional Record, et cetera, will likely pass overwhelmingly. And if I am correct in that, I would be inclined for us to stand back in this discussion, if the gentleman agrees with me, and perhaps discuss this further as we go to conference.

What would be the gentleman's reaction to that?

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

And I do as well.

Reclaiming my time, the gentleman is always a gentleman.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, and I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) control 2\1/2\ minutes of that time.

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

Mr. Chairman, since 1999 we have appropriated over $170 million to the Capitol Police specifically for security enhancement. In addition, we have provided $84 million for the Architect for perimeter security. In addition to the $2,345,000 provided in this bill for general expenses, the Capitol Police have $32,653,000 in unobligated balances, for a total of almost $62 million.

This $2 million amendment is interesting, but the police, in this instance, do not need an additional $2 million, and because of that, I strongly oppose the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I appreciate very much my colleague's comments. Mr. Chairman, during the markup of this bill, we pared down the total requests considerably from roughly $3 billion to $2.8 billion, a 9 percent reduction from the requested amount.

The bill is currently only 1.7 percent over fiscal year 2005. This increase barely sustains services. It provides for cost-of-living increases, some inflationary items, and a minimal number of projects to keep our buildings and grounds in reasonably good order.

A further reduction of 1 percent will adversely impact the operation of the legislative branch during the fiscal year ahead.

The amendment would reduce the total bill to a level that is less than 1 percent over current services.

The reduction will severely impair the ability of the House and legislative branch agencies to provide the full cost-of-living increases for all of our employees.

This is a good bill that has received balanced consideration. It is nice to say we will cut 1 percent across the board, but frankly, that is really not the way to legislate, and because of that, I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), my colleague.

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

Mr. Speaker, by way of suggesting that the leadership on both sides of the aisle made the decision about building our visitors center and that process has gone forward, and many a fit and start, but nonetheless it is going to be the largest expansion of the Capitol in modern time. It is going to be a fabulous visitors center when it is all completed.

The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I have been on the other side of that issue in the past; but, nonetheless, like the visitors center, the Speaker has suggested we include the continuity of government item in this package. That too is at a pay grade that is above mine, and I feel very strongly we should have some mechanism to make certain that in times of a real tragedy the House can get its work done.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to take just this minute to express my deepest respect and appreciation to both the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) for a fabulous job. We had a rather extended discussion today, which is not usual for this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate both of my friends yielding and having this discussion. But, this extended kind of dialogue and exchange we had on the floor today was one that was a very healthy discussion.

I have had many experiences here of late with my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). And when I have had a great day, and when I really had a great day, it has involved a week in which we have worked our way through the processes that lead to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and I having more than one discussion a day for several days during that week.

And I go home to California. And then, kind of taking in a deep breath on Saturday. Sunday morning I go out back, smile when I am feeling good, and I walk across the pool. And, gentlemen, I want you to know I get wet every time.

In the meantime, it is a wonder, and a wonderment working with the two of you. You have done a fabulous job. We very much appreciate the leadership on both sides of the aisle on this very important matter.

Mr. Chairman, I rise only to express my strong support for the Dreier-Kolbe amendment, which recognizes that Congress has a long-standing understanding of the fact that the difficulties of immigration, the challenges of illegal immigration especially, are a Federal responsibility.

What the gentleman is proposing is not creating a grant program, but rather reimbursing for funds already spent to meet the challenge of our borders. Indeed, it is very important that we move forward in terms of funding. This $50 million amount raises the total to $405 million, only about 25 cents on the dollar relative to the national cost. It is a very important change.

Mr. Chairman, I urge everybody to support the Dreier-Kolbe amendment, and I thank the gentlemen for their work.

Mr. Chairman, I very much appreciate my chairman, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), for yielding me whatever time I might consume. I really rise because I want the House to know that this bill is perhaps one of the most positive reflections of what our Appropriations Committee can do at the subcommittee level when we work in a very professional and highly nonpartisan manner to address major problems that face our country.

The question of homeland security and the need for expanding effectively our work in this arena is obvious. Both the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) have done a fabulous job of working together.

The staffs are not just outstanding, they have produced a product of which we can all be proud. Indeed, as we go through the process today it is conceivable this product may change because of untoward circumstances. But I must say in the arena that involves homeland security we do have a new authorizing committee that has been put together. They have yet to produce their first product this year, but they are working diligently to try to move in that direction.

It is our desire to help them be successful. And over time I am certain that we will be able to help them be successful. If money has anything to do with this process we hope to have a very positive influence.

In turn, the bill as it is currently formed is being used effectively for oversight. We all know that this department is something much different than an elephant or a hippopotamus or a donkey combined. It is the merging of some 22 agencies, an attempt to put together the homeland security department.

As we attempt to massage the process to make sure this agency can operate effectively, clearly the Appropriations Committee has a role to play. In their attempt to provide effective oversight, before oversight has been done by way of the authorizing committee, for they have not had a chance to do that yet, it is very important that dollar pressure get the attention of this organization.

Let me just mention one area in the area of the Coast Guard's work, in the Deepwater arena. Preceding 9/11 they were on a plan for working and developing their responsibilities in Deepwater efforts. Subsequent to 9/11, the chairman has been pushing them to move in the direction of remodeling their plan to reflect this new world that we are living in.

And the chairman has worked, by way of language in past bills, he has worked by communication with the leadership of the new agency, he has done everything he can to have them be responsive to a plan that is not just a 5-year, but a 20-year plan that tells us where these sizeable number of dollars are going to be spent to impact that piece of our security.

And indeed the lack of response from the Coast Guard is astonishing to me. I mean, indeed, you would think perhaps that this subcommittee did not exist because they presume that money for them would be automatic around this place.

Well, the Chairman has done a great job of trying to send a message that says, we expect you to have a real world plan that reflects post- 9/11 realities. And that language is important to our ability to provide oversight in the months that are just ahead.

I would hope that all of us working together would recognize that sometimes you use the vehicle that is available to have oversight that will impact an agency whose attention we absolutely must get. Otherwise we could waste not just 6 months or a year, we could waste 2 or 3 years while we are getting our act together.

Indeed, let me return to my original point; that is, this subcommittee has done a fabulous job. If you will just read this bill and look at the care that has been taken in every section, staffs on both sides of the aisle indeed should be applauded for their effort at causing both the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo) and my colleague, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), for doing a fabulous job on behalf of our Nation's security.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations have until midnight May 13, 2005, to file a privileged report making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations have until midnight, May 13, 2005 to file a privileged report, making appropriations for the Department of Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a true leader for quality higher education in California, University of Redlands President, Jim Appleton. Over the past 18 years, Jim Appleton has helped a small liberal arts college gain a national reputation for excellence and progressive thinking.

The University of Redlands was established by the American Baptist Church nearly 100 years ago in what was then a small farming community east of the growing Los Angeles urban area. In the intervening century, both the city of Redlands and the University have grown in population and sophistication. The university is now an independent liberal-arts school, and the community is known throughout Southern California for its historical housing districts and support for the arts.

The University of Redlands was already becoming a modern institution when Jim Appleton was named president in 1987. Its student body had grown to 1,280, and its endowment was a respectable $24 million. It had been rated highly in the widely-read survey of colleges by the U.S. News and World Report magazine.

Jim Appleton came to the University of Redlands from the University of Southern California, where he had been a faculty member, vice president for student affairs and vice president of development. He brought a can-do spirit from that national powerhouse institution.

Appleton balanced the university's books in 1989 for the first time in years. A new ball field was added in 1994, and a new NCAA-quality aquatics center opened in 1996. Overall, the college has invested $140 million in new facilities in the past 18 years--compared to $21 million in the previous 20 years. The building program is continuing with a new science center, new environmental studies center and new mathematics facility. Along the way, many of the college's historic structures have been renovated and modernized, as well.

New academic programs include Environmental Studies, Race and Ethnic Studies, and Theater. The college has increased its full-time faculty by 40 percent, and has added professional schools in business and education. Three graduate degree programs are now offered--in music, communicative disorders and in geographic information systems--the latter a collaboration with the internationally known GIS company ESRI, which is also headquartered in Redlands.

The success of the university is easily measured: The student body today is 2,450 in the undergraduate schools, and an additional 1,965 in the graduate programs. The endowment is now in excess of $107 million, and the university has raised $70 million of a $100 million Centennial Campaign begun in 2004.

As a member of Congress representing Redlands, I have been pleased that my colleagues have seen fit over the years to provide federal funds to further innovative programs at the university. The returns on the investment have ranged from informative studies on desert environment systems to new methods for teaching technology to classroom teachers. I have found it especially rewarding to work with my friend Jim Appleton, who has shown such dedication to his university and to the city we both call home.

Mr. Speaker, after 18 years as president, Jim Appleton has decided to ``retire'' and become university chancellor. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking him for his years of service to the education of our young people, and wish him and his wonderful wife Carol the utmost success in their future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate Concurrent Resolution (S. Con. Res. 31) to correct the enrollment of H.R. 1268.

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

Mr. Speaker, the resolution instructs the enrolling clerk to correct a provision in division B of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations conference report that was drafted incorrectly.

The conference agreement included a provision to make available an additional pool of permanent resident visas only for nurses and physical therapists.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, since this change is merely a technical item in nature, I urge swift adoption of this resolution so we can expedite enrollment of the bill and get it to the President for his signature today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the conference report to accompany the bill, H.R. 1268, and that I may include tabular material on the same.