Robert Aderholt

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I object.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to the City of Haleyville, Alabama as it holds the annual 911/Heritage Festival in June of each year. On Friday February 16, 1968 the Speaker of the Alabama House, Rankin Fite dialed 911 in Haleyville Mayor James Whitt's office and Congressman Tom Bevill picked up the receiver in the Haleyville Police Station resulting in America's first emergency dial telephone service. Since that first call in 1968, the overall plan to establish this service nationwide has been implemented and become second nature to the American people. Today anyone can dial 911 in any type of emergency, such as sickness, fire, police, or ambulance and a policeman on duty will immediately summon the help needed. Although there are no specific figures available, it is clear the 911 service has saved countless lives across the country. This impressive accomplishment all began in the city of Haleyville which is in the Fourth Congressional District of Alabama. As a lifelong resident of the city of Haleyville, I am proud of this achievement and pay tribute to this accomplishment which is something we can all support.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to James Ramey, District Ranger, Bankhead National Forest, Bankhead Ranger District, National Forests in Alabama. Mr. Ramey has worked 34 years caring for the land and serving the public. He started his journey while attending school at Oklahoma State University, earning a degree in forestry while working on the Ouachita National Forest, Poteau Ranger District in 1965 and will end this journey on June 3, 1999. He served three years in the U.S. Army, earned the rank of 1st Lieutenant and served one year in Vietnam. In April 1986, Mr. Ramey began working on the Bankhead National Forest as the District Ranger. During this time period he achieved a number of important accomplishments such as the success of using $700,000 provided by former Congressman Bevill to build a horse trail, multiple-use trail and hiking trail. He helped to manage stream side management zone practices that led to the protection of mussels and other aquatic species; he was instrumental in the design and layout of Clear Creek and Corinth Recreation Areas and also in trying to help operate additional recreational facilities during a time of increased use and decreased budgets. In April 1991, his leadership efforts led to the Bankhead Ranger District being recognized by the Southern Region of the National Forest Service as the best unit within the southeast. As someone who grew up around the forest, I know how much his efforts have been appreciated and how he will be missed by everyone who cares about the Bankhead National Forest. I extend to Mr. Ramey, his wife Zondra, and his family best wishes for a job well done and hope he will have many years ahead to enjoy a well deserved retirement.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, due to my wife having a medical procedure in Alabama, I was unable to cast rollcall votes on April 13, 1999. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 81, H.R. 46 the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor Act; and I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 82. H. Con. Res. 35 commending the people of Qatar for recent elections and commitment to the principles of democracy.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I come before my colleagues in support of H.R. 4 this afternoon and thank the chairman of the committee and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) for the work they have done on this bill. No one wants a nuclear version of the shocking surprise attack that America suffered on December 7, 1941, at Pearl Harbor. I am glad, then, that on a daily basis the administration is moving closer to support for deployment of a national missile defense system. We use the words like ``limited'' and ``rogue'' nations. However, there is no official list of so-called ``rogue'' nations. Any deployment plan that does not protect us against all known current weapons is a roll of the dice with our national security. If we are serious about deployment, here is one litmus test. We must start testing major systems frequently, three or four times a year. Slipping into a schedule of once every 9 to 12 months is not acceptable. Let us give our program managers the funding and political freedom to try and fail and then try again quickly. We must get serious about this. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 4.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer), for bringing forth this piece of legislation and for allowing us this debate today. Mr. Speaker, from looking over the different letters from different and various Members of Congress, I am not surprised to see claims that imports have dropped, claims that have been offered in an effort to convince all of us that the crisis in this country with steel dumping is over. Let me be very clear on three points. First, when finally faced with a trade petition like the one filed in September of 1998, foreign countries which dump steel on the U.S. market simply switch from one category to another. All the while they are laughing at the slowness and the expense of our trade enforcement process. Second, I appreciate the hard work of the Commerce Department but when we hear about an expedited trade process we must realize that this is merely shaving off 20 to 30 days off a 9- to 12-month process. Third, by allowing dumping we are deliberately sacrificing productive, nonobsolete but productive United States jobs. I would just ask my colleagues today, as they are looking over this piece of legislation, to look at it very closely before voting. Get a complete look at the issue of steel and the steel imports that have come into this country, and I think when my colleagues see an accurate picture of this they will be led to support this bill. I just ask for support today on H.R. 975.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, sometimes an industry suffers from foreign competition because a new tool is invented or product quality goes up without a price increase or their government reduces regulation and taxes. But this is not the reason that the U.S. steel industry is suffering. Since 1980 it has modernized, it has streamlined, and it is 240 percent more efficient. The International Trade Commission announced that foreign companies have indeed dumped hot rolled steel at prices below their own market. That announcement and the suspension agreement with Russia might provide some relief, but a key fact is often missing from the discussion. Some of these same countries have simply switched their dumping to other categories of steel. Russia has played that game since 1997. The coming weeks and months are very critical to saving these United States jobs. This Congress must act. It must act quickly in order to save American jobs and our steel industry here in the United States of America.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. President, on roll call no. 25, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, it gives me no pleasure to rise this afternoon in support of impeaching our President, William Jefferson Clinton. But make no mistake about it, it is Bill Clinton who has brought us to where we are today. And the issue here is not the relation that Bill Clinton had with Monica Lewinsky but rather the credibility and the honor under oath that must exist within the institution of the Presidency and which has been squandered by the current occupant of this high office. There are absolute applicable standards by which we all must live. If we do not live up to those standards, we will no longer be that nation which stands as a beacon of hope for all the world. This President has backed up his words of repentance with action that can only be characterized as stonewalling. There are many who say that the President, what he has done, is no big deal and that anyone would do the same. As a relatively young man, I remember a time in this great Nation when those endowed with public trust and those that were elected to public office were held to a higher standard. Today, with this vote, we take a step toward restoration of honor and responsibility.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for the U.S. troops who are bravely carrying out this current action against Iraq. Being deployed and separated from one's country and family is difficult at any time, but especially during the Christmas season. I join millions of Americans and others around the world in praying for their safety during this time. I also pray the Iraqi people will find a way to create for themselves a government headed by legitimate leaders who can bring them back into the fold of law-abiding nations. Until such change takes place, I fear that the military presence of the United States, Britain, and other nations will have to be maintained at great financial cost. For several years, President Clinton has submitted to Congress a defense budget in which he refused to include funding for the expensive peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. This forces Congress to add so-called emergency funding beyond the budget agreement or else seriously damage the readiness of our other military forces by transferring money from their budgets. With the almost certain end of the weapons inspection mission, we face yet another prolonged, expensive deployment of U.S. troops and equipment. In light of his continued use of military forces for a wide range of missions, I call upon the President to ensure a timely release of all funds in the FY99 defense bills and the one billion dollars included in the omnibus bill for national missile defense. I also ask that he respond in a positive way to the many calls for a defense budget which will meet the demands placed upon our military. We need to support our troops not only in word, but also in deed, by providing the resources they need to do their job.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce my support of House Resolution 598, introduced by Mr. Traficant. I am pleased that today Members have an opportunity to vote on a tough, reasonable House Resolution addressing this issue. The leadership has been negotiating almost around the clock with the Clinton administration on the budget, so I appreciate their attention to this also very important matter of aiding the U.S. steel industry. With all the budget talks going on, why have we members of the Congressional Steel Caucus pressed so hard for a vote on steel in these last days of the session? It is because the U.S. steel industry is in a crisis. It is too late to make leisurely proposals as if we were addressing a problem of the future. The problem is NOW; orders to U.S. steel companies are at 50% of normal NOW; families are out of work NOW. Some oppose a one-year ban on certain foreign steel products and say that such an action is too strong. Consider these two facts: (1) U.S. companies wishing to file a trade petition about dumping must first spend six months gathering data so that their case will be taken seriously; (2) there is approximately six months of foreign steel currently piled up in ports from Alabama to Maryland to Ohio. Voting yes on this resolution is the very least we should do as Members of Congress to help a U.S. industry which is unfairly being sacrificed in the name of global stability. I have said before and say again--it is wrong to kill U.S. jobs for the purpose of keeping afloat foreign governments and economies. The U.S. steel industry has streamlined and modernized. No one can compete against unfair, below production-cost prices. This resolution is similar to my bill H.R. 4762, and I commend Mr. Traficant on his long-term leadership on this issue. Vote yes on this resolution to urge President Clinton to take immediate action. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) for their work to bring this resolution to the floor today. The United States steel industry is the most efficient and competitive in the world. Currently, however, the industry is in a crisis due to the dumping onto the U.S. markets of below-cost production of steel from countries in financial distress. Although I support this resolution, I strongly believe that we must have an immediate ban on certain foreign steel imports to give the U.S. steel industry a level playing field. My bill, 4762, which has 6 Republicans and 5 Democrats, does that. The current GATT agreement and the U.S. review process for trade complaints do nothing to help the families who have already lost their jobs. It is wrong to let American jobs die as part of a back-door foreign policy method for keeping foreign governments and economies afloat. By leaving our ports open to this flood of steel while Europe maintains trade barriers is exactly what we are doing. I urge the President to immediately stop this flood of foreign, unfairly priced steel. If our trade partners do not like it, let them file a case and go through the same lengthy bureaucratic process that we have to suffer. Seven steel company presidents, 12 Governors and the United Steelworkers of America have pleaded with the President to halt these imports. This resolution urges the President to engage Europe and Japan to end their trade barriers. I ask for everyone to support this resolution as a first step in an effort to give America's steelworkers a fair chance to compete.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I am introducing today the U.S. Steel Jobs Protection Act, a bill with already 10 bipartisan cosponsors. This bill imposes an immediate 1-year ban on hot-rolled steel from Japan, Brazil, and Russia. Our trade partners, knowing the slowness of the petition process, have dumped millions of tons of below-cost steel on the U.S. market. Thousands of permanent U.S. jobs will be lost by the time the petition process concludes. The U.S. steel industry mass modernized and cut production man-hours per ton from 10 to three. This strong, by temporary, action must be taken if we are to be serious about helping families who work for the steel industry. We urge support for the bill and strongly urge the President to take immediate action to help America's steelworkers. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing ``The U.S. Steel Jobs Protection Act,'' a bill with ten bipartisan cosponsors. Currently, U.S. steel producers are in a crisis due to outrageously unfair conditions. Membership in the World Trade Organization, and signing onto the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) implies a willingness to abide by fair trading practices in order to avoid what some call trade wars. Unfortunately, a number of countries experiencing severe financial crisis have knowingly allowed their steel companies to export steel to the United States at a cost far below their own domestic market price or even below the cost of production. While I understand the need for income by these countries, I do not condone what at best is a reckless disregard for the effect that such exports have on workers in our steel industry. Since the 1980's, our steel industry has modernized and streamlined. In 1982, it cost roughly 10 man hours per ton to produce U.S. steel. In 1998, the average is below 4 MHPT. The U.S. steel industry has invested over $50 billion in steel plant modernization over the past two decades. The industry employed 425,000 in 1980, and 160,000 in 1998. The U.S. steel industry forecasts that imports of hot-rolled steel in 1998 will be over 500 percent of that imported in 1995. According to industry analysts, some foreign steel is being sold at one-third the cost of production, or more. Clearly, the U.S. steel industry has done its part. No business can long withstand that kind of assault. I wish that a gentle call to our foreign trading partners for reasonable action would suffice. I am afraid that we are way beyond that point, however. U.S. companies and unions filing a petition for relief from unfair trade practices know that they must wait until severe financial damage is evident for their petition to be acted upon with any urgency. Even then, the best they can hope for is a partial resolution in 160 days. Such cases usually take 12 to 18 months. The current crisis in the steel industry is too great for that kind of wait. My bill imposes an immediate, temporary moratorium on the further import of certain steel products from three countries--Japan, Russia, and Brazil--for 1 year. Upon completion of the case filed September 30, 1998, duties may be assessed on all steel dumped at a below-cost price retroactive to one year prior the filing of the petition. Should this bill become law, that 1-year retroactive aspect would also apply to any other petitions naming other countries engaged in similar steel-dumping practices. I realize that there are some concerns about our obligations under the GATT agreements and as a member of the WTO. I agree that we should keep our word and treat all of our trading partners fairly. I also believe that our first obligation as Members of the federal government is to protect the citizens of the United States. What we are currently experiencing is not a minor misunderstanding, or a cultural difference in economic practices. We are the victim of a deliberate action which is harming our domestic steel industry. Not defending ourselves in this situation is akin to unilateral disarmament while being fired upon. My suggestion of a temporary import ban is not a strike back; it is a recovery period from a battle in which we are wounded. If you believe that membership in the WTO and accepting GATT overrides all U.S. federal laws, historical precedents, constitutional authority, and the moral duty of the federal government to its citizens, I wish you would please come to Gadsden, Alabama and explain that to the 150 or so families who have lost their income, or will lose it within a few weeks. Please explain to the remaining 2000+ steel industry employees that they must sacrifice their jobs to outrageously unfair trade practices so that we can stabilize the governments and economies of other nations. I don't think they will understand. Nor, frankly, will I. If our neighbors, our foreign allies need help, let us discuss in a reasonable and straightforward manner on this House floor a plan specific to each country regarding how we might help them--and by that I do not mean throwing away billions of dollars to the IMF board, who have no idea where billions of dollars recently sent to Russia have ended up. I would like to see this bill become law. I would like to see the President take a serious look at his authority under various U.S. trade laws and take action himself to impose a temporary import ban so that the industry might have a period in which to recover. If our trading partners do not like these suggestions, the solution is easy. Let them admit to the wrongness of their actions, and present to the President a serious plan for halting or slowing imports and making reparations directly to the U.S. steel industry. The United States of America is strong, and generous. Let us help our friends abroad, but let us stop sacrificing U.S. jobs in what amounts to an unfunded, unauthorized, program of foreign aid.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 458, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, today we continue to mourn the loss of two of the finest men this Capitol has known. John 15:13 states that, ``Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'' Had John Gibson and J.J. Chestnut not put themselves in harm's way, the lives of many would have been lost in last week's tragic event. These two men of courage laid down their lives so that their friends, coworkers and tourists visiting from around the world would be safe. We are truly blessed to have men and women of such noble character and bravery serving on the Capitol Police force. As thousands of visitors came together yesterday to walk through the Capitol Rotunda to pay their respects to these men of courage, I realized that we are only able to safely visit this building which is a symbol of freedom because of the service of the many members of law enforcement we have here in Washington. We must never take for granted those who serve to protect and preserve the freedoms that we enjoy here in the United States Capitol, and across this nation. My prayers go out to the families of these two heroes who died that we might live. The memory of their actions will not be soon forgotten.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I know many have heard about the news and it will be or has been discussed today about the abortionist in Arizona who delivered the little girl and later discovered that he had misguessed the child's age. And rather than 23 gestational weeks old, the little girl had reached the age of about 36 weeks on June 30, when her 17-year-old mother subjected herself and her baby to a planned partial birth abortion at an AZ Women's Center in Phoenix. This is not the first time this abortionist had this happen to him. He is currently being sued because one of his patients bled to death following an abortion in 1996. But the story of this latest mishap, which came to light just this past week and received wide coverage across the country, is just one more reason why we need to ban this procedure, which is a cruel form of infanticide, pure and simple. Abortionists across the country knowingly commit partial birth abortions on babies as young as 20 gestational weeks, and they will continue to kill these babies and endanger the lives if we do not act today to override President Clinton's veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Act. A baby delivered prematurely between 23 and 24 weeks would have a one-in-three chance of survival in a neonatal unit if delivered under normal circumstances and certainly would not feel the excruciating pain of a partial birth abortion. So the question we will vote on today is quite simply whether we oppose allowing a fetus to suffer excruciating pain or whether we support life. I am proud to stand here today with those who oppose infanticide and support life.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to a point of order.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, when we are on a tight budget, we have to make choices. We cannot buy expensive tickets to the theater or even go to the movies if we can barely afford to buy our food and pay our rent. At a time when we are talking about a debt in this Nation of $5.5 trillion, when we are talking about balancing the budget, it is difficult to explain to the American people why we need to spend $98 million for such a program as we are talking about here today. We all support the arts, but it does not seem fair to make the hardworking people of this country pay for exhibits that are only art by name, because in many cases they are pornographic, they are profane, and would be viewed with disgust by the majority of the people who see it. When we are trying to balance the budget, as I mentioned, when we are trying to reduce the size and the scope of the Federal Government, can anyone honestly place arts on the same level as, say, providing for our national defense and improving our Nation's infrastructure, improving or saving Medicare and Social Security? The National Endowment for the Arts has proven time and time again that they cannot be trusted as good stewards of the people's money. This is a travesty and a slap in the face of those people who call themselves Christians and who believe in the Christian faith and the religious values that have made this Nation great. I think we must show the American people that we are serious about changing the way Washington spends their money, and I think we should eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts. I urge my colleagues to vote against the Johnson amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, the two paragraphs beginning on page 88, line 10, and all that follows through page 89, line 6, include unauthorized appropriations in violation of clause 2 of House Rule XXI. The language I have just specified is an appropriation of $98 million for the necessary expenses for the National Endowment of the Arts. Authorization in law for the National Endowment for the Arts expired in fiscal year 1993. Clause 2 of House Rule XXI states ``No appropriation shall be reported in a general appropriations bill for any expenditure not previously authorized by law.'' Since the National Endowment of the Arts is clearly not authorized in law and the bill includes an appropriation of funds in this agency, I make a point of order that the language is in obvious violation of clause 2 of Rule XXI.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) for working to protect children as well as the rights of the parents. As has just been mentioned a few moments ago by my colleague, children cannot go to a trip to the museum without their parents' consent. Children cannot be given a minor pain reliever like aspirin without their parents' consent. So the real question becomes, why should a child be allowed to undergo a life-changing and dangerous medical procedure such as abortion without their parents' knowledge and permission? This act that we are discussing today, the Child Custody Protection Act, will seek to protect the rights of parents to choose what is best for their minor children. I know it has been mentioned here today, but let me mention again that currently 22 States have parental notification laws, but what good will it do if a child can be taken across State lines by a total stranger to the parents and receive an abortion in a neighboring State. The fact is that some abortion clinics actually advertise in the phone books, with the words, ``No parental consent required.'' It makes it very clear that these young women are being exploited. This violation of the parents' rights to make medical and moral decisions for the children has gone on for too long. Parents have a right to know what is happening to their children, and this bill that we are discussing today will strengthen those rights and protect young women from those who would seek to capitalize on this kind of vulnerability. I am proud to stand here today in favor of the Child Custody Protection Act. I urge my colleagues to support this bill that will protect the parents' right to know.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4060, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1999, and for the hard work of Chairman McDade and Ranking Member Fazio. Although the allocation is tight, they managed to craft a bill that reverses the irresponsible cuts in the budget for the Army Corps of Engineers and other infrastructure projects that are so important to this nation. However, I am concerned about the lack of funding for the non-power programs administered by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). Since its creation in 1933, TVA has had two responsibilities in the Tennessee Valley: produce electric power; and to provide flood control, navigation, and manage aquatic vegetation growth along the Tennessee River and its tributaries. Many people in Washington today confuse the non-power programs with the larger issue of electric utility restructuring. I realize that last year the House decided to eliminate funding for non-power programs because the Chairman of TVA, Craven Crowell, announced in early 1997 that TVA would forgo non-power programs to concentrate on the production of electric power. The residents in the Tennessee Valley and the state and local governments expressed a strong desire for TVA to continue its traditional non-power programs. Under the agreement reached last year between the House and the Senate, TVA is scheduled to receive no funding for these important programs in Fiscal Year 1999. However, the Senate has included $70 million for the programs, and I am hopeful that when the Energy and Water bill goes to Conference, the House will reconsider funding the non-power programs for Fiscal Year 1999. Until there is an alternative with a clear transition, it is imperative that TVA continue these programs through the appropriations process. The ratepayers of my Congressional District, and throughout the Tennessee Valley, deserve no less.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join Governor Fob James in recognition of Western Hills of North Alabama Advantage for Relocation and Retirement during Retired Citizens Month in Alabama. North Alabama is home to a significant number of retired citizens. Due to the beautiful natural environment and pleasant weather, people find North Alabama a comfortable place to retire. I commend the people at Western Hills for being fine ambassadors of the State of Alabama and improving the quality of life for all in our State. I would like to insert into the Record the Governor's proclamation in recognition of Retired Citizens Month in Alabama. Whereas, the Western Hills of North Alabama Advantage for Relocation and Retirement is dedicated to the development of a positive image of North Alabama; and Whereas, the Western Hills of North Alabama for Relocation and Retirement promotes community activities, recreational opportunities, historical sites, and many other unique attractions that are indigenous to North Alabama so that more of the nation's retirees will want to relocate to our great state during their retirement years; and Whereas, retirees carry tremendous importance to the State of Alabama, contributing greatly to our employment, economic prosperity, and international trade relations; and Whereas, retirees not only contribute to our State through financial means but through their sharing of a lifetime of experience and knowledge that can be passed down to our younger generations of Alabamians; and Whereas, the State of Alabama supports the Western Hills of North Alabama Advantage for Relocation and Retirement for its efforts to increase the numbers of retirees that relocate to our state: Now therefore I, Fob James, Jr., Governor of the State of Alabama, do hereby proclaim June 1998 as Retired Citizens Month in Alabama, to further show our State's appreciation for the retired population. March 18, 1998. Mr. Speaker, join me in recognizing June as Retired Citizens Month in Alabama.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), an amendment that could literally save the lives of countless children throughout the United States. Abortion creates several risks for women, it is well-known. Also, abortion drugs are often dispensed without a doctor's approval. Because of the numerous possible side effects associated with abortions, these drugs should not be administered without consultation and medical follow-up with the doctor. The Food and Drug Administration has an ethical duty not to approve a drug that will be harmful to mothers taking the drug. The research on RU-486 is insufficient in regards to long-term effects, the linkage with breast cancer and medical complications. I commend my colleague, the gentleman from Oklahoma, for taking steps to save children and to save their mothers from these life-endangering drugs. I would encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, the Constitution was intended to guarantee freedom of religion, not freedom from religion, but there are those who have clearly been determined to drive out all traces of religion from the public sphere. They have ignored the religious traditions upon which this great Nation was founded. When a small child in De Kalb County, Alabama, is subjected to two restrictions on how, when and where they can pray, this is not freedom. When tax dollars are used against people that will go to pay court- appointed monitors to go into the schools, this is not freedom. This amendment does not endorse any one religion, but it, rather, states that religious expression such as prayer, which has deep-rooted significance in the history of this Nation, should not be excluded from the public square. How can we promote integrity in our leaders and improve the moral fiber of our people without a basis and some absolute standard? George Washington, of course, the Father of our Country, probably said it best in his farewell address when he said morality could not be maintained without religion. His words were, ``National morality cannot prevail in the exclusion of religious principle.'' As has been mentioned here today, we open each session with prayer in this Chamber, the face of Moses looks down on us all as we stand here this afternoon, and we should not deny that same privilege to our children and the people of the United States of America. This amendment reaffirms that we are a Nation dedicated to religious liberty, and I am proud to stand here on the floor of the United States House of Representatives to speak out in support of public religious expression and against the proposition that religious values and people of faith should be relegated to the back seat of public life. I commend my colleague, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), for bringing this issue to the national attention, and I strongly urge my colleagues to support religious freedom.