Richard Baker

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. As he knows, I have an amendment pending relative to the Panama Canal. Given the gentleman's concerns with regard to the impact of the amendment and the timeliness of its consideration, there are approximately 30 Members who have expressed interest in the issues raised by this amendment in that with the abandonment of the United States' military presence in that theater, many of us are concerned about the threat of drugs coming through Panama into our Nation, as well as the inability of us to appropriately respond in the case of international defense needs. For that reason, I was hoping to condition an appropriation in this act, to predicate it upon the good faith negotiations between the Government of Panama and the Government of the United States to allow the reinitiation of military presence, either at Howard Air Force Base or whatever appropriate location may be determined. In light of the chairman's concerns about the consequences of this amendment, I will not offer the amendment, but wish to seek the chairman's agreement and assistance as this bill moves forward to seek whatever manner or remedy may be available to us to initiate discussions for the reestablishment of some military presence within the country. I thank the chairman for his courtesies in yielding to me.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have this opportunity to congratulate the LSU Tiger Baseball Team on winning the 2000 College World Series and clinching their fifth NCAA championship in ten years. The final game of the College World Series promised to be very exciting and to the fans of this series, it lived up to this expectation. Stanford, the College World Series Team of the 80's, fought a hard battle against the LSU Tigers, the College World Series Team of the 90's, to determine who would claim the title in 2000. And with a lot of sweat, hard work and determination, that decision was made in the bottom of ninth inning when the LSU Tigers rallied from a 5-2 deficit to win the NCAA championship, beating the Stanford Cardinals 6-5. It is with tremendous pride that I congratulate LSU Coach Skip Bertman and all the players of the LSU Baseball Team for a great game. I know that both the coach and the players gave the game their entire heart and demonstrated to baseball fans all around this country what a good baseball game is made of. I salute you and look forward to seeing LSU win more College World Series titles in the future.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have the opportunity to congratulate Dr. Robert Jacobsen upon his retirement as Director of the National Hansen's Disease Programs and the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center in Carville, Louisiana. During his distinguished 33-year career at the center, Dr. Jacobsen played an important role in helping to define the evolving leprosy chemotherapeutic regimens that are the key features of the world elimination program for this disease. Dr. Robert Jacobsen, a native of Austin, Minnesota, received his B.A. in Chemistry and Math from the University of Minnesota in 1954, his Ph.D. in Organic and Physical Chemistry from the University of Wisconsin in 1958 and his M.D. from the University of Minnesota in 1962. Jacobsen started his career with the Public Health Service as Chief of Medicine at the U.S. Public Health Service Hospital, Carville, LA, which later became the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center; a position that he held until 1992. In addition, Dr. Jacobsen also served as Chief of Clinical Branch from 1978 to 1992. His numerous awards and recognitions include the Public Health Service's Commendation Medal, Meritorious Service Medal, and Distinguished Service Medal, as well as the Secretary's Award for Distinguished Service. Dr. Jacobsen has also served on numerous international advisory boards including the Tuberculosis Task Force of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization's Working Group on Leprosy Control, the International Leprosy Association, and the World Health Organization's Special Action Projects for the Elimination of Leprosy. In addition to Dr. Jacobsen's lifelong commitment to leprosy research, treatment and eradication, I would also like to recognize and thank him for his help in making the transition from the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center to the Carville Academy a smooth one. He can take great pride in knowing that his efforts at the center have not only helped his patients, but will also help thousands of youth for years to come. Again, it is an honor to have this opportunity and I wish Dr. Jacobsen all the best.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, this is National Hospital Week, when communities across the country celebrate the people that put a human face and human touch on health care. This year's theme sums it up nicely: ``Touching the Future with Care.'' It recognizes the health care workers, volunteers and other health professionals who are there 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, curing and caring, for their neighbors who need them. An example of this dedication is the hospice at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola, Louisiana. The program won the American Hospital Association's prestigious Circle of Life Award, which recognizes innovation and improvement in end of life care. The hospice at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, the largest maximum security prison in the United States, provides a humane and caring environment to the terminally ill. Inmates dying in the prison hospital can now spend more time with their families, be comforted by specially trained fellow inmate volunteers, and have their pain managed in a setting that is especially wary of the use of drugs. This innovative program not only gives the dying their dignity, it gives the inmate volunteers an unusual opportunity to connect with another person and give their own life some purpose. The program has also become a model for other prisons in Louisiana and across the nation. Mr. President, I congratulate the hospice at the Louisiana State Penitentiary for its award-winning program.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the importance of autism awareness, as well as to offer my support and to express my admiration for my constituents, Shelly and Aiden Reynolds, for their hard work and dedication in co-founding Unlocking Autism. Unlocking Autism is an organization dedicated to raising public awareness about autism as well as raising money for biomedical research. This organization has launched a national awareness project called Open Your Eyes, and is striving to collect 58,000 pictures of persons with autism from across the United States. This collection will debut in Washington, DC from April 5th thru 9th of this year. The Hear-Their-Silence Rally is a response to the fact that autism and related conditions have been estimated to occur in as many as 1 in 500 individuals (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1997). This statistic is higher than the incidences of Multiple Sclerosis, Downs Syndrome, or Cystic Fibrosis. At least 400,000 people in the United States are affected, and yet little is known about this disease. When people become aware of a disease, they will begin to strive for, and demand action to further the understanding and prevention of that disease. To this end, I am pleased to be sponsoring legislation that will express the sense of the House of Representatives. I urge the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee to recommend to the Postmaster General a commemorative postage stamp which would further the cause of autism awareness and place autism before the American people. Shelly and Aiden Reynolds have used the reality of their son Liam's diagnosis of autism to fuel their fight to bring this disease to the fore front of national awareness. Countless others have joined their efforts. A commemorative stamp would give a face to those individuals afflicted with autism. Let us give them a voice

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, today, Chairman Leach and I introduce a bill to improve the regulation of the three housing GSEs: FannieMae, FreddieMac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks. The bill is designed to implement a GAO recommendation to consolidate GSE regulation into one independent board. Currently, three agencies regulate the three housing GSEs. The Federal Housing Finance Board regulates the Federal Home Loan Banks for safety and soundness and mission compliance. HUD regulates the mission compliance of FannieMae and FreddieMac; the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight regulates them for safety and soundness. Based on several studies it conducted, GAO found that the creation of a single regulator to oversee both safety and soundness and mission compliance of the housing GSEs would lead to improved oversight. GAO identified these advantages: A single regulator could be more independent and objective than the separate regulatory bodies and could be more prominent than either OFHEO or FHFB. The regulators' expertise in evaluating GSE risk management could be shared more easily within one agency. A single regulator would be better positioned to be cognizant of specific mission requirements, such as special housing goals or new programs, and should be better able to assess their competitive effect of all three housing GSEs and ensure consistency of regulation for the GSEs. GAO analyzed different regulatory structures that could be used for a single housing GSE regulator. It found that an independent, arm's- length, stand-alone regulatory body headed by a board would best fit its criteria for an effective regulatory agency. GAO cited these advantages: An independent regulatory body should be positioned to achieve the autonomy and prominence necessary to oversee the large and influential housing GSEs. Using a board would enable Congress to provide for representation that could help ensure the regulator's independence and provide appropriate balance and expertise in the regulators' deliberations of both safety and soundness and mission-related issues. A board could be structured to provide equal links to HUD, due to its role in housing policy, and Treasury, due to its roles in finance and financial institution oversight. I believe that an independent board consisting of five persons, including representatives from HUD and Treasury, is a more effective oversight agency for the three housing GSEs than the current regulatory system. The Federal Home Loan Banks, FannieMae, and FreddieMac have essentially the same mission: to provide access to mortgage credit for families throughout the United States. We should not have inconsistent regulations for them. In short, the bill seeks to improve supervision and to diminish the systemic risk of FannieMae, FreddieMac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks. The provisions in the bill intend to do the following: 1. Consolidate regulation of the three housing GSEs. 2. Reform the approval process for new GSE initiatives. 3. Limit GSEs' non-mission related investments. 4. Remove each GSE's line of credit with the Treasury. 5. Impose uniform risk-based capital requirements on the GSEs. 6. Require annual credit ratings of each GSE. 7. Puts into statute the current GSE practice of maintaining the conforming loan limit to reflect downward movement in average home prices. 8. Equalize the capital treatment of GSE and private-label mortgage- backed securities. 9. Study the exposure of the deposit insurance funds to GSE failure. 10. Gives authority to the new regulator; the power to appoint a receiver in case of GSE failure. Times of crises are never the best time to act because the focus is on past problems rather than on future risks. We must not forget the painful lessons from the 1980s. Taxpayers can be put at risk during systemic downturns in economic activity. The recommended actions in my legislation are The housing GSEs are large and growing larger. The total obligations of the three housing GSEs is about half of our $5.6 trillion federal debt. To assure they remain healthy throughout economic downturns and that taxpayers are never called upon to bail out GSEs, my bill aims to improve their supervision. I hope that the House of Representatives consider the merits of my legislation as I conduct a series of hearings. Section by Section Analysis A Bill to consolidate and improve the regulation of the housing-related government-sponsored enterprises and for other purposes Title I--Housing Finance Oversight Board Subtitle A--Improvement of Supervision Sec. 101. Establishment of Board The Housing Finance Oversight Board is established as an independent agency in the executive branch. The Board succeeds to the authority of the Director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB), and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in regard to the enterprises (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). The Board consists of five full-time members, including the Secretary of HUD, the Secretary of the Treasury, and three U.S. citizens appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a term of six years. The appointed members must have extensive experience or training in housing finance, financial institution regulation, or capital markets. Not more than three members may be from the same political party. No Board member may hold any office, position, or employment with any FHLBank, enterprise, or FHLBank member, or hold stock in any FHLBank member or enterprise. The President designates an appointed director to serve as Chairperson of the Board. The Chairperson carries out the Board's policies, acts as spokesperson for the Board, and represents the Board in its official relations with the federal government. The Chairperson acts as chief executive officer of the Board, responsible for the operations and management of the Board. Sec. 102. Duties and Authorities of Board The Board's principal duties are to ensure that the enterprises and the FHLBanks operate in a financially safe and sound manner, carry out their mission, and remain adequately capitalized. The Board also exercises general supervisory and regulatory authority over the enterprises and the FHLBanks. Sec. 103. Public disclosure of Information The enterprises and the FHLBanks are required to publicly disclose at least annually financial, business, and other information that the Board determines is in the public interest because the information would increase the efficiency of the secondary mortgage market or the housing finance system. Sec. 104. Personnel The Board may not delegate any function to any employee, administrative unit of any FHLBank, or joint office of the FHLBank System. Sec. 105. Assessments The Board may annually assess the enterprises for reasonable costs and expenses, without Congressional appropriations approval. Receipts from Board assessments on the FHLBanks must be deposited in the same Treasury Department Fund as assessments on the enterprises. Sec. 106. Public Disclosure of Final Orders and Agreements Public disclosure requirements of orders and agreements concerning the enterprises are extended to the FHLBanks. Sec. 107. Limitation on Subsequent Employment The two-year limit on subsequent employment of former Board officers or employees by the enterprises is extended to the FHLBanks. Sec. 108. Regulations The Board must issue any regulations and orders necessary to carry out its duties. Sec. 109. Termination of authority of HUD The Secretary of HUD's general regulatory authority over the enterprises is removed, including affordable housing goals. HUD retains Fair Housing Act responsibilities. Sec. 110. Approval of Board for New Activities The Board has the authority to approve new activities and to review ongoing activities of an enterprise or a FHLBank to ensure legal compliance. An enterprise or FHLBank may not commence any new activity before obtaining the Board's approval. New activity is defined for the enterprises and the FHLBanks, respectively. The Board may approve a new activity only if it is authorized by law, the Board determines the enterprise or FHLBank can conduct the new activity in a safe and sound manner, and the Board determines the new activity is in the public interest. An enterprise or FHLBank proposing to implement a new activity must submit to the Board a written request for approval; the Board will publish this request in the Federal Register for at least a 30-day public comment period. Within 90 days of Federal Register publication, the Board will approve or deny the request. If the Board denies a request, the enterprise or FHLBank may seek judicial review of the decision. Sec. 111. Limitation on Nonmission-related Assets The Board must limit the nonmission-related assets that the enterprises and the FHLBanks may hold at any time. Sec. 112. Conforming Loan Limits Puts into statute the current GSE practice of maintaining the conforming loan limit to reflect downward movement in average home prices. Sec. 113. Definitions Inserts the new Board in the Definitions section. Sec. 114. Supervision of Federal Home Loan Bank System Makes the FHLBanks subject to the supervision and regulation of the Board. Sec. 115 Amendments to Title 5, U.S. Code Strikes Director of OFHEO and Chairperson/Directors of FHFB and inserts the new Board, with regard to executive schedule pay rates. Subtitle B--Reduction of Systemic Risk Sec. 131. Annual Review of Enterprises by Rating Organizations The Board will annually provide for two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations to assess the financial condition of each enterprise, each FHLBank, and the FHLBank System to determine the level of risk that they will be unable to meet financial obligations, taking into consideration the legal status that those obligations are not guaranteed by the United States. These assessment must include assigning a credit rating, using a scale similar to what the organizations use for the obligations of other financial institutions. Sec. 132. Annual Reports Requirements for annual reports and enforcement action reports concerning the enterprises are extended to the FHLBanks. Sec. 133. Risk-based Capital Test for Enterprises Allows the Board to make changes in the stress period circumstances of the risk based capital test for the enterprises. Sec. 134. Effective Date for Supervisory Actions Shortens from one year to six months the effective date for supervisory actions applicable to undercapitalized enterprises, subsequent to the risk based capital test taking effect for the enterprises. Sec. 135. Appointment of Receivers If an enterprise is critically undercapitalized or a FHLBank does not comply with its leverage and risk-based capital requirements, the Board may appoint a receiver to liquidate or wind up the affairs of the enterprise or FHLBank. Sec. 136. Repeal of Treasury Lines of Credit Repeals the $2.25 billion line of credit from the Treasury Department for each enterprise and the $4 billion line of credit from the Treasury Department for the FHLBanks. Sec. 137. Board Membership on Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council Makes the Board a member of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FIFIEC). Sec. 138. Elimination of Super-lien for Federal Home Loan Banks Eliminates the priority given a FHLBank's security interest in the assets of a member financial institution that fails. Sec. 139. Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation Establishes a FHLBank Finance Corporation as a federally- chartered instrumentality to issue and service the debt obligations of the FHLBanks. Management of the Corporation is vested in a board of directors, with each FHLBank having one representative (an officer or director of the FHLBank) on the Board. Consolidated obligations issued by the Corporation shall be the joint and several obligations of all the FHLBanks. Sec. 140. Capital Treatment of Private Label Mortgage-backed Securities Expresses the sense of Congress that proposed agency rules addressing the treatment of privately issued mortgage backed securities under risk-based capital requirements are appropriate and the final rules should not be significantly altered. Sec. 141. Study of Effects of GSE Failure on Depository Institutions The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in consultation with the Federal Reserve Board, will conduct a study of the existing exposure of depository institutions to default or failure of the enterprises and FHLBanks and the effects such failures would have on depository institutions. The study will determine: (1) the extent of equity, debt, and mortgage- backed securities issued by the GSEs that is held by depository institutions; (2) the likely implications for depository institutions arising from such holdings if any GSE fails to meet risk-based capital requirements, is more severely undercapitalized, or defaults on its financial obligations; and (3) the effects on the financial exposure of depository institutions to GSEs from restricting loans to a single borrower. Subtitle C--General Provisions Sec. 161. Conforming and Technical Amendments Amends statutes to insert the new Board. Sec. 162. Effective Date The effective date is 270 days following enactment.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, we need to make sure that America's schools, libraries, and rural clinics are allowed to capitalize on the newest computer and data communications technology. In 1996, Congress and the Clinton Administration joined together to establish a program to extend the Internet to all our schools. That effort is underway--at a cost of about $2.45 billion a year, incidentally. But in this field, just like everywhere else, it is the weakest link in the chain that matters. And, the ``weak link'' here is the data communications network--or, more accurately, the lack of such a network. Mr. Speaker, instead of trying to expand these networks by harnessing the power of competition, economic freedom, and individual choice, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seems to be relying on yesterday's tools--heavy handed and restrictive regulation. That's not my estimate, it's the considered judgment of two of this country's experts--Congressman John Dingell and his colleague, the Chairman of the House Telecommunications Subcommittee, Congressman Tauzin. Their appraisal of the situation is that we need to modernize and reform FCC regulation--because, otherwise, the data links which this country needs, are just not going to be available. That is the philosophy reflected in their bill, H.R. 2420. And, it is a pro-growth, pro-progress view which I want to embrace. Mr. Speaker, if we can accomplish reform in this field, all of the experts are predicting that there can be a rapid expansion of our communications networks. That expansion, in turn, will help connect our schools, libraries, and clinics faster. And that will yield substantial public policy dividends.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I think some folks have really missed the boat tonight. If my colleagues do not want privacy restrictions, then vote against this bill. The first Federal privacy statute ever. Who does it apply to? Banks, insurance agents, securities companies. Does it apply to Wal-Mart? Does it apply to General Motors? Does it apply to anyone else in the world? No. For the first time it applies to financial institutions and financial in nature only. They cannot sell an individuals' private information, without that individual's permission, to a third party. Some people wanted to go further. They wanted to really shut it down. They wanted to make sure credit unions could not do their work behind the counter by contracting with third parties to handle their check- clearing processes. If my colleagues want to go further, fine, deal with the credit unions and small banks of this country and tell them they cannot do their business any longer. I think some people have missed it. Big bank bill? This bill, for the first time, provides 15-year fixed rate interest rate loans for small businesses, rural, and agricultural communities through small hometown banks. Small banks shut down Wal-Mart. If my colleagues want to make sure Wal-Mart in your town soon, running the hardware department, running the tire department, running the frozen food department, and, yes, running your local bank, vote against this bill. Because there is a loophole that has been shut down that would allow Wal-Mart coming soon to your hometown to run your bank. Small bank? Consumer? This bill is it. I cannot imagine what my colleagues are thinking.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate a constituent of mine, Ms. Tammara Deane' Crawford on her selection as a 1999 Debutante of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority. Ms. Crawford is to be commended for her accomplishment and is, in my opinion, very deserving of this honor. Ms. Crawford is sixteen years old and is a senior at Woodlawn High School in Baton Rouge. She sets the example for many of her classmates by being involved in both the Student Government Association and the Woodlawn High School track team. Not only has Ms. Crawford been a positive example to her peers at Woodlawn High School as a scholar, a student leader, and an athlete, she is also a shining example to her community. Ms. Crawford, in her spare time, is an active member of St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church, the Louisiana National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the African American Christian Youth Organization, and the Baton Rouge Area Girl Scouts of America. In addition to her involvement with these community organizations, Ms. Crawford also volunteers her time with the Volunteens as well as teaching the proper handling of horses at a local camp, Camp Marydale. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Crawford represents everything that is right with our youth in America. At a time when the news regarding our young people is so disturbing, and quite frankly depressing, it is refreshing to take the time to look at young women like Ms. Crawford who not only recognize the need to excel in their studies, but also recognize the need to become involved in society at large. I am proud to know that she is a constituent in Louisiana's Sixth Congressional District and I am proud to have this opportunity to recognize her achievements. Mr. Speaker, I know that you and all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives join in congratulating Ms. Tammara Deane' Crawford upon her selection as a 1999 Debutante of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority. I know that she has made her parents, Eddie and Myra, and her sister and brother, Taylor and Timothy very proud.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, in 1993, the Clinton administration directed the Corps of Engineers to establish an administrative appeals process for wetlands determinations. That instruction came with a 1-year time line to perfect those guidelines. However, it was 1995, a full year later, before the Corps proposed an administrative appellate process but was not able at that time to fully implement that plan. It was then 2 years later, in January of 1997, that the Corps testified that they would need some $5 million to implement their administrative review process. The Congress responded and made those funds available. In 1998, in January, the Corps announced the appellate process that they were formulating as a result of the $5 million appropriation would only review denied permits, not jurisdictional determinations. Why is this significant? Well, it means a small landowner or a small businessperson must go through the entire administrative appellate review process and spend significant amounts of money to defend their right to their property. Only when they were denied were they then able to go on to an administrative appeal if the Corps' proposal had been enacted. In 1999, the Congress was told that the Corps would need an additional $5 million to implement an administrative appellate process to include jurisdictional determinations. Now, finally, some 7 years after the Clinton administration directed the Corps to prepare and implement an administrative appellate process, we find in this legislation, as proposed by the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard), the important remedy to small landowners across this country. For those who do not live in a State like Louisiana, where increasingly human habitation is being found impermissible by the Corps of Engineers, it may be difficult to understand the significance of wetlands determinations. A couple who owns a small dry cleaners back home worked hard, many hours, saving as best they could to put money aside to acquire their dream of homeownership. They bought 5 acres of property in a rural part of Livingston Parish. As they were making their decisions about where they might build their home on this piece of property they were acquiring, a friend told them they had better call the Corps of Engineers and have them come out and make a determination before they decided on their building location. Well, the fella happened to own a tractor, and what is called back home a bush hog, a piece of equipment for cutting grass, normally. Well, he took the tractor and the bush hog and he went out and topped the 5-acre tract so he could get a better idea of where the trees were located and what might be an attractive place to put the home. When the Corps of Engineers came out, they were not particularly impressed with this young man's activities. They determined right off the bat, using an inaccurate floodplain map, that the property in question was a wetland and that he had inappropriately cut down young trees. Not only were they not allowed a permit to build in a timely fashion on that property, they were told they had to replant 50 trees at their expense and be responsible for the life of those trees, for their continued growth and safety. This couple soon realized what they had gotten themselves into: that they had spent 10 years of their life working to save money to buy their American dream only to be told by a government agency, ``I am sorry, if you want to object to our determinations, you are going to have to go all the way through the process; and only at the end, if you are denied a 404 permit, will you have the right to go to court and spend more money to try to overturn a decision of the United States Government.'' This is ridiculous. The couple has abandoned their hopes of building on the 5 acres and are now back in their dry cleaners, working again this evening, trying to save money to buy another piece of property on which they hope to build their home. Now, we are not asking that the delicate environmental balance that exists in this country be upset. But let me tell my colleagues, those of us from Louisiana understand delicate environmental balance. Our economy is based on agriculture and fisheries. The wealth of the Gulf of Mexico feeds most of the people around here who go to Washington restaurants and eat these crabs that say made in Louisiana, though I would be interested in knowing where they really come from. Our biggest problem with the environment is not polluting waters, it is gill- netters from out of state, who take monofilament nets and, frankly, destroy our fisheries by hauling them out of state for other purposes. What we are asking for is just a simple opportunity. If the Corps of Engineers says a landowner cannot build their house on their property that they paid for, we think that landowner should have a chance to have a jurisdictional determination first. Does the Corps have the right to do this to this landowner and can the landowner not get this determination made before they have to spend thousands of dollars defending their right to own property in what is supposed to be a free country. I congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) and the committee for finally having put in to a proposal a decent common sense opportunity for small business people and landowners around this country to have the chance to be heard before the government takes their land away.

Mr. BAKER. The gentleman is absolutely correct. I appreciate him for correcting the official record on this matter. I would point out, however, it is the small ones that come from Maryland.

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BAKER. I just wish to point out that the appropriations process gave an additional $11 million for regulatory and administrative procedures in the proposed budget, and, secondly, just a quick Louisiana note, we lose more wetlands in one 2- or 3-day period from one Stage or Level 3 storm called a hurricane than we do in the entire year of normal geological processes. If the gentleman really wishes to help us save wetlands in Louisiana, we just need a few bucks to do some onshore revetments to protect whatever precious wetlands we have left. Otherwise our coastline is going to be up somewhere south of Arkansas.

Mr. BAKER. I will agree with the gentleman, if he will yield further just quickly. One of the problems, which I know that he would not support, would be to let the Mississippi River meander to its natural course.

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I just wish to point out the only modification the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) would make is to allow, at the beginning of the 404 process for these small acreage tracks, a determination to be made whether it is or is not a wetlands; no construction, no damage, no wetlands lost. Only a small property owner can go into the United States Government and say, ``Is this really a wetlands before I spend all my money to get my property back?'' That is all the gentleman's amendment would do.

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield on that point?

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I just wish to make the esteemed Member's opinion clear on the underlying text of Mr. Packard's in this bill. If it is adopted without the Visclosky amendment, no damage to wetlands occurs in the gentleman's opinion. It only allows the land owner to come in and say, ``Mr. Corps, is this a wetlands; yes or no,'' before they do anything. So there is no damage occurring as some have alleged in the debate here tonight.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Madam Chairman, I certainly appreciate the gentleman's interest and wish to express my full cooperation on these matters and others that will be before us on the Federal Home Loan Bank. I congratulate the gentleman from Pennsylvania and thank him for all his courtesies and cooperation over the year in making this a reality.

Mr. BAKER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time; and I wish to extend my appreciation and congratulations on the job the chairman has done over the decade. He has committed himself to the goal of financial modernization. I do not think without his persistence this evening would have been possible. I wish to speak tonight directly to the issue of what is in this bill for the small town bank. With all the discussions about op-subs, opting out, and privacy issues, there are a great deal of concerns that affect many people, but when it comes to the 9,000 small institutions across this Nation, I think it is important to point out that they are struggling like any other small business to survive. Often their product, money, is hard to come by. As banks merge and acquire one another, small town banks do not often have the partner down the street that can take part of that loan and help them extend credit in the local community. The Federal Home Loan Bank provisions in this legislation provide an extraordinary new opportunity for small town banks. For banks in asset size under $500 million, which is about 85 percent of the banks in America, they can now go to the Federal Home Loan Bank and get credit. And get this: Fixed interest rates for up to 15 years; and now for small business and agricultural lending purposes. With the passage of H.R. 10, we are opening up small town America banks to the Federal Home Loan Bank credit window and giving them the opportunity to meet the needs of working people, small businesses and farmers across this country. I think it is high time we do something in this Congress for those small banks which have been too long ignored and neglected. And in this process tonight, due to the leadership of the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), we are going to meet this important community need. I congratulate him and the ranking member on what I think will be an important, successful night when we pass H.R. 10.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Madam Chairman, if we listened to the previous speaker's concerns about security and privacy in today's world, with computers on everyone's desk at home, computers across this Nation in business at this moment exchanging billions of pieces of information, we should be extremely concerned about privacy. I would merely point out, if Al Gore had not invented the Internet to begin with, we would not be having this problem tonight. But let us get to the current state of law. The fact is, if we do not adopt this amendment and approve this bill there is no privacy constraints not only on financial institutions but on free enterprise institutions outside the financial marketplace. Let us talk about the amendment. What does it do? It says, if someone is outside the bank, we can no longer give them proprietary private information of those customers, which does not belong to them. We cannot sell it to them, we cannot give it to them, we cannot do anything with it because that is prohibited by this law. First time ever. Federal law prohibits the use of proprietary financial institution information to third parties. This is a major step forward. This kind of reminds me like my first experience in one of those big grocery stores. As I walked down the aisle I saw jeans for 12 bucks. First time in my life. That was a big deal. I walked around the corner, and I saw tires for four-wheelers. My goodness, how did they get here? I went around the next corner, and I ran into one of these nice ladies, and she had these little bitty wieners they only give out one at a time. But they were selling those little wieners in the store, along with the tires, along with the jeans, along with everything else. I thought this is amazing. What convenience. And great prices, too. If we adopt this bill tonight, without the extreme provisions that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) proposes, we can have the same thing in financial services. We can go to one location and we can buy insurance, we can invest in stocks, we can manage our retirement fund, all with the ease of dealing with one person and one institution. What about the small town bank? The guy who runs the small town bank, he is the loan officer, he is the chief executive officer. He opens up in the morning; he closes at night. He sells insurance. If we took the Markey position with technology, that guy would have to have some type of surgery to split his head because he could not talk to the customer about two products. It would be prohibited because he would be sharing information improperly. Please, this is a good product. It is the right approach. It is the right time.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a distinguished law enforcement officer. Bobby J. Robinson, Vice President of the National DARE Officer's Association Board of Directors, was sworn in as President on June 10, 1999. Mr. Johnson's dedication to law enforcement and drug education has extended for over 17 years. As President of the Officer's Association, Mr. Johnson will lead over 35,000 officers and educators in DARE program classrooms across the United States and around the world. Their important message to young people across this nation is to ``Just Say No'' to drugs. Bobby Johnson's law enforcement career has moved him throughout Louisiana and across the nation. Beginning in 1982, Mr. Johnson worked for the Caddo Parish Sheriff's Office in Shreveport, LA, serving in areas of corrections, patrol, public relation, and DARE; finally ending his 10 year tenure at the rank of Sergeant. In 1993, Bobby was recommended to be the Coordinator for the Louisiana DARE Training Center operated by the Red River Delta Law Enforcement Planning Council. After serving 6 years at this facility, the Louisiana DARE Officer's Association nominated Bobby for the office of 1st Vice President on the National DARE Officer's Association Board of Directors. Mr. Johnson won this election in Salt Lake City that would be a four year position on the board, progressing from 1st Vice President, to Vice President, to President, and concluding with Past President. Presently, the National DARE Officer's Association is holding their annual conference in Washington, DC between the 7th and 10th of July. The Drug Abuse Resistance Education program is our nation's most prominent and visible attempt to educate young people to resist drug abuse. It reaches over 60% of elementary school children in the United States, and is far and away the most prevalent drug education program in use today. Mr. Speaker, Bobby Johnson not only serves his country diligently, but also is a fine husband and proud father. He and his wife of 17 years, Kathy, have three beautiful daughters between the ages of 6 to 12. I, along with his family, and all of the citizens of Louisiana, salute his accomplishments and his active leadership in educating the children of America to ``Just Say No.'' Thank you Mr. Bobby Johnson.

Mr. BAKER

Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to commend the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) for his effort in organizing this opportunity for Members this evening on what is a difficult but obviously very significant occasion of the announced retirement of our good friend, Bob Livingston. So many speakers have come to this mike already this evening and talked about Bob's passion. We do not have to guess where Bob Livingston stands when it comes to an important issue. Everybody knows. And it is always an informed opinion, one strongly held. Bob is a person for whom all Members have great regard. There is sometimes some concern if he happens to be on the other side of the issue because you know he is going to be very persuasive, and I can speak from direct knowledge on that subject. I can also say that, as an ally, one cannot have a better friend. Rather than to talk about a lot of things, I would simply point to one important project that I worked on for 3\1/2\ years in this Congress with Bob Livingston as chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. All too often, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations is viewed as the person who has to do the tough things, cut the budget, tell people no. But there is another side to that responsibility which all too often is ignored. There was a facility within the Sixth District of Louisiana that really was in deplorable condition. It had ministered to people in a certain health condition for well over 100 years and was under significant budgetary pressure to close. It was historically significant, a facility that was built in the mid-1800s and had served a great and long mission of caring for people who otherwise were viewed as social outcasts. I went to Bob with the problem and told him what we wanted to do with that facility, which was to create a new education and job training program for at-risk youth, young people who were out of high school, had not gotten their GED, who were not yet in trouble with the law but were likely to end up in a life of social dependency or, worse yet, in the criminal justice system. It took 3\1/2\ years, but Bob Livingston would be pleased to know that this April the first class of young adults will enroll in the Carville Academy. These are people who are going to be given a chance, not just to get a GED, not only to get job training, but, at that facility, they will be guaranteed a job upon the completion of their successful course work. That is not something many of Bob Livingston's constituents would have the opportunity to see. But it is commitment to doing something right that makes a positive difference for people who otherwise may never even know Bob Livingston's name. That is the kind of fellow he is. He has commitment, purpose and principle. He never gives up. He does not quit. For the people of the Sixth District and all of Louisiana, we will not only miss his colorful leadership, we are going to miss his positive, principled leadership in this House. For that, we will all suffer loss. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.