Floor Statements

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

I rise in support of H. Res. 581, not simply because I have the great honor to represent 15,000 civilian employees at Tinker Air Force Base and 6,000 at Ft. Sill Army Post and thousands of others throughout the district; not just because my own father, who had a distinguished 20- year career in the United States Air Force, followed that with, I think, an equally distinguished 20-year career as a civilian employee at Tinker Air Force Base, but because I think H. Res. 581 expresses equity, good management, smart personnel policy, and, frankly, is also an asset to our national defense.

Opponents of the idea of equal pay for military and civilian personnel quite often point to the inflation issue as something that they focus on. Frankly, I think the real question is the 32 percent wage gap between private sector and public sector employees, something that this House and this government has historically tried to address over time. I think we should continue on that path.

I also think it is of the utmost importance that we retain qualified personnel in Federal civilian service. Over 50 percent of that workforce is now within 5 years of retirement at Tinker Air Force Base. It is an extraordinarily skilled force. It needs to be encouraged; and, frankly, we need to have the incentives to recruit equally qualified people in the future.

I think in the end, Mr. Speaker, this is simply a matter of good policy. I have good friends on both sides of this issue. I think the motives are very good, but the reality is we know we need a first-rate military. We know we need to pay for that. We need a first-rate civilian personnel force to back them up when we are in conflict and, frankly, when we are not. So I am very proud to support this particular resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 557 expressing the views of the House on the liberation of Iraq. Frankly, I find myself amazed that this resolution is the topic of such an extended and spirited debate.

Who can seriously dispute H.R. 557's main points? The world is safer with Saddam Hussein in prison as opposed to being in power. If anyone questions that, let them ask the citizens of the two Muslim countries he invaded, the Kurds whom he gassed or the Shiites whom he butchered by the thousands. The Iraqi people should be commended for their courage in overcoming 35 years of oppression and they should be

recognized for adopting an interim constitution and moving forward toward a democracy, similar to the same situation faced in our own Civil War.

Certainly the United States military and our allies in the coalition deserve to be recognized for their heroic service and their valor on the battlefield and their continuing struggle in Iraq.

The American people and our allies ought to also take pride in what we have done to improve the lives of the average Iraqi. Since the end of the war, 4.2 million children and 700,000 pregnant mothers have been vaccinated. Over 30 million vaccine doses have been procured and 22 million actually delivered to Iraq. By the end of 2004, 90 percent of Iraqi children will have been vaccinated against polio, tuberculosis, and measles; 600 primary health clinics have been reequipped to provide health care, dozens of schools opened, colleges kept operational and the sanitation extended.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud of what America and Americans have done in Iraq. I hope and trust that pride is shared by Members of this House and every American.

Mr. Speaker, on March 3, 2004 for rollcall vote 38, I was unavoidably detained. If I had been present, on rollcall vote No. 38, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, it has been said by some that the American economy is in chaos and decline. I come to the floor today to counter such nonsense with the facts. After the shocks of the recession and the tragedy of 9/11, the economy has experienced 60 consecutive months of job growth and during that time has added a total of 364,000 new jobs to the economy. In point of fact, the unemployment rate is currently lower, lower than the average unemployment rate during the 1970s, the 1980s and even the 1990s.

Since 2001, the U.S. economy has grown more than twice as fast as the economies of Europe and Japan. Our economy is in better shape and growing faster than any member of the G-7 group of industrialized nations. America is the largest exporter in the world and the main source of economic growth in the world. Productivity growing at 4.1 percent annually over the last 3 years is at an historic high. The economy is expected to grow faster from 2003 to 2004 than any other year in the last 20.

Mr. Speaker, the number of Americans working today stands at 138.3 million, the highest number in the history of this Nation, higher even than the number of Americans who were working in January of 2001. And most Americans are prospering like they never have before, with family net worth hitting a record high of $44.4 trillion. This is in part because the home ownership rate stands at 68.5 percent also an historic high.

I cite these figures not because I believe there is nothing that can or should be done to further promote economic growth and job creation, but instead, to provide some perspective on how the media and the other side of the aisle are misrepresenting and misportraying the facts concerning the state of our economy.

Mr. Speaker, the truth is most Americans are not fond of the pointless debate over when the recent recession began or who was responsible for it. This debate does nothing to lower the unemployment rate. It is an exercise in political histrionics.

We are now experiencing economic recovery and that is something most Americans do care about. What matters to them is how to maintain and sustain and expand that recovery. To sustain this recovery, I believe we need to simplify the Tax Code. We need to reduce the burden of frivolous lawsuits on our economy. We need to pass an energy bill to ensure an affordable and reliable energy supply. We need to streamline regulations and paperwork

requirements on small businesses that are the driving force for job creation in this country. And we need to reduce the deficit.

Mr. Speaker, Congress is beginning the effort to tackle the budget deficit, which I believe has been primarily caused by out-of-control spending and should be solved by controlling the growth in spending. We could balance the Federal budget within 5 years if we held increases in Federal spending to 2 percent a year. Inside the Beltway I know, to some that is an unthinkable sacrifice, but how many families, how many businesses had to limit their spending by similar amounts during the last few years? What we must not do is pass legislation that would make this economic recovery come to an abrupt halt.

We should not take the easy way out of our budget problem by raising taxes. The tax cuts for families and small businesses created this economic recovery and raising taxes would put the breaks on this economic recovery.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the issue of government spending. Prescription medicines for seniors, helping families own their own homes, supporting education and defending America--the list of the government's responsibilities to the American

people is numerous. But, while it is the government's responsibility to provide assistance to the needy and fund programs for our children and seniors, it is intolerable to provide these services at the cost of leaving a crippling burden of debt on our children and grandchildren.

When Congress passed the budget last year, it required us to identify ways to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse. A task force was put together that was asked to report its findings. Since then, Congress and the General Accounting Office have identified over $85 billion in waste and fraud in government programs.

There are quite a few outrageous examples of wasteful Federal spending. The Energy and Commerce Committee reported that by eliminating double-payments for welfare and Medicaid the Federal Government could save $3.7 billion over 10 years. The Education and Workforce Committee found that the government could save $340 million each year by allowing the Internal Revenue Service to verify the income eligibility of Pell Grant applicants. The Judiciary Committee reported that the Department of Justice spends about $2 million a year more than necessary on employee training.

There are also numerous examples of duplicative programs. The Federal Government has over 50 different programs in eight Federal agencies to assist the homeless. Sixteen of those programs are specifically reserved for the homeless. Most of these programs have different eligibility standards and application procedures, making it difficult for the homeless population to receive help. The Federal Government operates 342 programs working in economic development. Six agencies and 26 programs serve to build roads and streets. Seven agencies and 31 programs fund water and sewer-related activities.

Mr. Speaker, while these findings are a great step in reducing government spending there is still more work to be done. The percentage of waste in the Federal Government would be intolerable in the private sector. I believe that with further investigation and inquiry, we can find even more examples of waste, fraud and abuse. Congress should be accountable for every dollar of the taxpayer's money. By reducing waste and duplication we can create a slimmer, more effective government. With a government as large and as far-reaching as that of the United States, small mistakes and oversights can amount to millions of dollars of waste. Correcting those mistakes and saving these dollars should be a priority for every member of Congress. Working Americans deserve the best possible government at the lowest possible cost.

Waste is a symptom of an ineffective government. Combating waste does not imply hostility toward government, but a desire to strengthen government programs so that they can serve constituents effectively. I believe it is possible to continue funding our priorities while also remaining fiscally responsible. By seeking to balance the budget we can bring accountability to government programs and departments.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the conference report on H.R. 2691. I am generally supportive of the bill's thrust and appreciate the good work of both the Committee on Appropriations chairman and subcommittee chairman. However, the provision inserted into this legislation relating to the Indian trust issue makes it personally unacceptable for a variety of reasons.

It is unacceptable, first, because it amounts to legislating in an appropriation bill, and I find that unfortunate.

Second, it was not included in either the original House or Senate bill, and consequently did not receive the scrutiny and debate that it deserved.

Finally, it is an effort, I think, inappropriately, to derail a judicial process that is already in progress. It is unfortunate that we are at this particular moment, and I regret having to vote against this bill. But I think had we operated through the Committee on Resources, let the processes in place work out, we could have arrived at a solution to the problem that was fair and equitable and trusted by all sides. It is with great reluctance that I rise in opposition.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Conference Report on H.R. 2691, the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2004. I am supportive of the general thrust of this bill, particularly the emergency funds to help fight the wildfires in the West. Moreover, I recognize the need to finish appropriation bills on a timely basis.

I respect the Appropriations Committee chairman and subcommittee chairman who laid out the broad framework for this generally laudable appropriations measure. I want to be clear that my criticisms of the substance of one part of this bill in no way are intended to reflect on the fine work and integrity of the chairman and the members of the committee.

However, I feel compelled to vote against H.R. 2691 because of one provision in the bill concerning the Indian Trust issue. This provision was inserted in language funding the Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians and would dictate the manner in which the Department of the Interior undertakes a complete historical accounting of individual Indian Trust accounts. It is clearly the first step in a process designed to impose rather than negotiate a settlement of Indian Trust account claims and to do so for as little money as possible regardless of the merits of individual cases or the historical culpability of the Federal Government in the mismanagement and theft of Native American assets held in trust.

This provision clearly violates the House Rule against legislating in an appropriations bill. Moreover, it undermines the excellent work of the Resources Committee, which has held two hearings on the Indian Trust issue and has been in the process of building a bipartisan framework to settle the Indian Trust issue in wake of the questions arising out of the so-called Corbel litigation. If this conference report is approved in its present form it will hinder the efforts of the Resources Committee to resolve this issue fairly and honorably for all concerned.

In addition to being legislatively and procedurally unsound, the provision in question is clearly designed to limit the ability of Native Americans to pursue their legitimate claims in court. Frankly, I predict that this effort will fail. However, it will cost the litigants and the Federal Government more rather than less money in the long run. Moreover, it will further poison the historically poor relations between Indian tribes and the Federal Government.

Frankly, I am appalled that this language was included in the conference report on H.R. 2691 since it was not part of either the original House of Senate Interior appropriation bills. It was added in the dead of night in order to avoid legislative scrutiny and open debate. This is a clear violation of the spirit if not the letter of the normal rules that govern the legislative process. It discredits the legislative process and should embarrass and disappoint every member of this body regardless of their position on the issue.

In my opinion, this language delays justice for half a million individual Indian Trust beneficiaries who have waited over 100 years for a full and fair accounting of the property which the Federal Government holds in trust for them. This is both reprehensible and unacceptable. I intend to work within the framework of this institution to see that the mischief done in this appropriations bill is ultimately undone.

Mr. Speaker, it is tragic that this provision was added to this otherwise praiseworthy and essential piece of legislation. Its inclusion makes it impossible for me or any other member who cares about the rights of Native Americans to support this bill. However, I take comfort in the fact that this issue will be dealt with again, both in the courts and in the halls of the Congress of this great republic.

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I shall not object, I rise to support this important resolution, H. Res. 198.

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

Mr. Speaker, this resolution encourages France, Germany, Russia and other countries to forgive the debt owed to them by Saddam Hussein's regime; to make generous pledges for Iraq's reconstruction at the forthcoming Madrid donor conference; to work with the Paris Club on debt forgiveness issues for Iraq; to acknowledge the role that Iraq's current debt has in hindering reconstruction efforts; and to educate their populace about the importance of debt forgiveness in Iraq's reconstruction.

France, Germany, Russia and other countries have all been vocal about opening up Iraq's reconstruction contracts. If they wish to participate in this process, they should have the generosity and decency to contribute positively to the reconstruction effort by forgiving the debts.

Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable for nations to expect the Iraqi people to repay the debts contracted by the terrorist and despotic regime of Saddam Hussein, particularly when those people were in part the victims of that regime and had no say in the loans in question. H. Res. 198 will assist the public debate in these issues going into the Madrid conference of donors and will put this House on record for supporting debt forgiveness on this significant issue.

Mr. Speaker, America's given its most sacred resource, the lives and blood of its soldiers, as well as billions of dollars, in order to rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein and begin the difficult task of reconstruction. It is only right that other nations should forgive their debt and begin to participate in the process.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 198. This is a resolution which I introduced several months go to address the inadequacies of France's, Germany's, and Russia's efforts in participating in the reconstruction effort. In doing so, I believe it best to highlight the outstanding debt owed to them by Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, the time has come for the consideration of its resolution. In the past year, the United States has committed its most precious commodity, the lives of our men and women, for the liberation of an oppressed people. It is not an action which we took lightly as a Congress, and one which we took after much consideration. Now we must win the peace, and in doing so, call upon the very nations who have indicated they would like to see the successful reconstruction of Iraq to forgive its debt.

The odious debt which the regime of Saddam Hussein contracted with numerous countries is not one which would be foisted upon the innocent people of Iraq. Now is the time for debt forgiveness and now is the time for the community of nations to come together and assist in solving this problem. In particular, France, Germany, and Russia must bear special responsibility for this because they represent the countries most vocal in supporting the illegitimate regime of Saddam Hussein.

The Speaker, the past policies of these countries were particularly helpful to Saddam Hussein's regime when United Nations Resolutions prohibited such relationships. They have requested that they be allowed to assist in reconstruction, and this is a first step.

Furthermore, because of their particular role over the last decade, it would be particularly helpful if they were to pledge greater amounts of money to aid in Iraq's reconstruction at the upcoming Madrid Donors' Conference. Thus, we have amended this legislation to reflect that fact.

Mr. Speaker, we are about to enter into a great debate over the substance of a Supplemental that will directly aid Iraq in its reconstruction. While there are a variety of opinions on the Supplemental, there is little doubt that America will keep her word to the Iraqi people and directly aid her in reconsideration. There is absolutely no question that we will not hold the innocent people of Iraq responsible for the actions of Saddam Hussein.

Vote ``yes'' on House Resolution 198.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1828, the Syrian Accountability Act. It is time for Syria, quite frankly, to make a choice. In Lebanon its troops have been there far too long. The sponsorship of terrorist activity against the State of Israel is no longer, and never was, acceptable. Finally, the porous borders between Iraq and Syria which terrorists move across is a constant threat to American troops.

As our President has said, There is no middle ground in the war on terrorism. It is simply not acceptable to cooperate in some areas as Syria occasionally has, and yet to cooperate with terrorists on the other hand as it constantly has done.

I am extraordinarily proud of the United States Congress for making this strong statement in a bipartisan fashion, and I hope the message will be understood and acted upon in Damascus.

Mr. Speaker, on October 10, 2003, one of our largest trading partners, the Republic of China on Taiwan, will be celebrating the 92nd anniversary of its National Day. I wish to join my colleagues in the United States Congress in sending best wishes to the twenty-two million residents of this lovely island. I also commend President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu as they continue to lead Taiwan to greater economic prosperity at home and greater participation in international activities abroad.

Just like our 4th of July, October 10 marks the beginning of a fantastic story of economic, social and political success that has culminated in Taiwan becoming a vibrant democracy in the Pacific Region. These are exciting times in the history of relations between the United States and Taiwan.

Mr. Speaker, on this 92nd occasion of the Republic of China's National Day, it is important to remember that Taiwan has a strong relationship with the United States, and we hope this relationship will continue to flourish and grow in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 3108, the Pension Funding Equity Act. This bipartisan, shorted-term fix is important so we can develop a long-term solution to the challenges faced by both employers and employees who participate in defined pension plans.

This interim solution is necessitated by an unusual combination of events: Record-low interest rates, although they are beginning to tick up; a stock market decline, although, frankly, that has now reversed itself and become a stock market rally; growth in the number of retirees; and discontinuation of the 30-year Treasury benchmark that previously provided the means used for determining funding liability.

Unless we make this temporary adjustment in H.R. 3108, employers will face demands on their capital that will lessen their ability to create jobs and invest in our future. Workers will have less certainty in terms of their own pensions, and that, in turn, may well affect consumer spending and affect this economic recovery.

H.R. 3108 provides the time necessary for the recovery generated by the Bush tax cuts, which is clearly underway, the continued generation of new jobs, and new increases in stock market values, which over time will ease some of the pension challenges that we face, and, frankly, ultimately provide a better environment in which to find a long-term bipartisan solution to this problem.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3108. It is simply the right thing to do.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague yielding to me.

I rise in very strong support of the supplemental appropriation that the President has requested. In doing so, I do not take the position, and I am sure my colleagues do not, that this supplemental appropriation will be free of scrutiny. We will look it over; and, frankly, we will check it out, and I have no doubt in the legislative process we will improve it greatly.

But I think as to the big question, the President has it right, and I think he has it right for three reasons. First, as has been alluded to several times by a number of speakers tonight, our own history gives us the lessons that we should be drawing in this particular case. In the First World War, we won the war, we participated with our allies, but we did not do anything to rebuild a shattered Europe afterwards. Less than a generation later, young Americans were dying again in the same fields, in the same countries, for the same cause. In the Second World War, we took a different approach and it was extraordinarily successful. We not only won the war, we won the peace, we secured Europe; and, in doing so, we set up a powerful example in Europe that saved that continent from the awful tyranny of Communism.

There is even a more recent example and, frankly, a less happy one that I think as Americans we ought to reflect upon. We were engaged indirectly and, to some extent, directly in the struggle in Afghanistan to push out the old Soviet Union, and we were successful in that. We walked away from the problem. And in walking away, we left a country that was destroyed, that was devastated, that was divided; and in less than a generation, frankly, in a matter of a few years, terrorists set in, took over and planned and launched a deadly attack on the United States that we have lived with the consequences of. We should learn from our own history.

The second reason I support this supplemental is, quite frankly, the situation in Iraq. There is no question Iraq is a potentially rich country, but it is not rich today. The oil revenues, the revenues that the people of Iraq generate from their hard labor and work need to be reinvested in Iraq and will be reinvested in Iraq. The reality is there is simply not enough wealth to be created to get the job done and to get the job done in a timely, expeditious way, a way that is good for Iraq and, frankly, in a time frame that makes it possible for our own people to leave as quickly as possible, which is what we want and what they want.

Finally, and most powerfully, I think I favor this resolution simply because I support our American troops that are on the ground there. We have asked a generation of young Americans to perform a dangerous and difficult task.

I serve on the Committee on Armed Services, Mr. Speaker; and every single military person that has come to visit with us has told us this is an important part of winning the war, securing the peace, and that these dollars, particularly spent on civilian projects and rebuilding and reconstruction in Iraq, enhance the security of American forces that are deployed. I want American troops to be looked upon as what they are: liberators and benefactors. I do not want them to be regarded as conquerors, occupiers, and exploiters; and I think the latter will be the case.

So, Mr. Speaker, I think this is a historic opportunity. All of us have a responsibility, I think, to do what previous generations of Americans have done: rise up, meet this challenge.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank the gentleman for his leadership. He has not only spoken eloquently tonight, but I too heard the gentleman repeatedly in groups, caucuses, and organizations; and the gentleman is doing a fantastic job.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support, for H.R. 3039, legislation introduced today by my colleagues and myself to expand opportunities in our great nation's higher education system. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this important bill and helping to increase access to postsecondary education.

For nearly four decades, the Higher Education Act has provided opportunities to students throughout the nation as they worked toward a postsecondary education. Now, in the technologically-driven economy of the 21st century, a college education is more important than ever. That's why the bill I am offering is so important; it will help remove barriers and ensure students have the opportunities they need to meet their educational goals.

The cost of college in America has risen rapidly over the past few decades, and this has made achieving the dream of a college education a difficult proposition for many students. However, though college costs are a significant impediment for many aspiring college students, they are but one of many unnecessary barriers to a college education in America. Expanding opportunities for students by removing these barriers will help increase access to college.

By encouraging innovative solutions such as distance learning and the use of advanced technology in the classroom, schools can provide non- traditional college students with a better chance to succeed. I also believe addressing the needs of America's minority serving institutions must be a priority, because these valuable institutions play an essential role in providing opportunities for many students.

There are several areas of particular importance in this legislation. Each of these provisions serves to break down barriers, remove obstacles, increase flexibility, and ultimately expand opportunities within higher education.

This legislation allows for fair and equitable treatment of all institutions, removing the arbitrary rules imposed on some and not others and providing all institutions the ability to compete for federal grants and better serve their students.

An additional unnecessary barrier in current law that is restricting opportunities for students and flexibility for schools is the so-called 50 percent rule. This rule arbitrarily restricts the number of courses that can be offered and the number of students that can be enrolled in courses offered via telecommunications. While this outdated rule was implemented to provide safeguards, times have changed and technology makes online education an important tool in achieving success for many non-traditional students. This bill takes the important step of repealing the 50 percent rule, while maintaining stringent requirements for quality to ensure the integrity of distance education programs is monitored and maintained.

The Expanding Opportunities in Higher Education Act also seeks to strengthen programs such as TRIO and GEAR UP which provide critical student support services. By providing these programs with the flexibility they need to meet the unique needs of the student populations they serve, programs such as these will expand opportunities and allow students to thrive.

Though the legislation I am offering includes many more important reforms, there is one more area of particular importance that I would like to address. Minority Serving Institutions offer tremendous educational opportunity, and I'm pleased that the Expanding Opportunities in Higher Education Act would make important reforms to allow these institutions the freedom they need to help their students succeed in higher education.

Like all institutions, Minority Serving Institutions must advance their technological capabilities with the changing times and advancement in technology. This bill would allow Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities among others to use a portion of their funds to expand Internet capabilities and other distance learning capabilities, encouraging the use of advanced technology and expanding opportunities.

The Expanding Opportunities in Higher Education Act builds upon the significant reforms for Minority Serving Institutions made in the Ready to Teach Act earlier this year. That legislation created a program to establish Centers of Excellence at high quality Minority Serving Institutions to strengthen and improve teacher training, expand recruitment of minorities in the teaching profession, and provide scholarships to help future teachers pay the cost of completing a teacher training program.

Taken together, these and the many reforms in the bill will help to renew higher education and expand opportunities, helping millions of students and the institutions which serve them. I'm pleased to speak in strong support of this legislation, and encourage my colleagues to join me.

Mr. Speaker, on June 10, 2003 for rollcall votes 252 and 253, I was unavoidably detained. If I had been present, on rollcall vote No. 252, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall vote No. 253, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, on May 9, 2003 for rollcall vote Nos. 177 through 182, I was in Oklahoma due to the devastating tornado that struck my District. If I had been present, on rollcall vote No. 177, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall vote No. 178, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall vote No. 179, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall vote No. 180, I would have voted ``yea.'' On rollcall vote No. 181, I would have voted ``no.'' And on rollcall vote No. 182, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 123, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''