Charlie Bass

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Nashua Lions Club on their 75th anniversary. Eighty-one years ago, insurance executive Melvin Jones and his fellow Chicago businessmen formed the Lions International. The group was created to focus on humanitarian acts of service. Several years later, after Hellen Keller challenged the Lions to become her ``Knights of the Blind,'' William Hillman, Jr., and former Mayor Alvin Lucier established the Nashua Lions Club. Since being chartered in 1923, the Nashua Lions have not only heeded Hellen Keller's call, but have lived up to their motto ``We Serve'' by making Nashua a better community and improving the lives of those who live there. After 75 years of hard work and selfless devotion, the Nashua Lions Club have raised and returned over $750,000 to their community. But the true measure of their impact on Nashua is not in the dollars they have raised, but in the lives they have touched. Most notably, the Nashua Lions have dedicated substantial time and resources to building projects designed to assist handicapped individuals. Under the leadership of former Mayor Mario J. Vagge, the Nashua Lions built the ``Friendship Club'' for the handicapped, and under the direction of past President Rich Nadeau, they constructed ``Melanie's Room'' for a handicapped young girl. Responding to Hellen Keller's challenge 77 years ago, the Nashua Lions have also worked closely with the Nashua school nurses to provide free eye exams and eye glasses to needy area students. They have spent over $30,000 in the last 25 years to buy new eye screening machines for Nashua schools. Aside from their numerous community and charity efforts, the Nashua Lions have also provided leadership to the entire Lions International organization. During their 75-year history, the Nashua Lions proudly have produced two District 44-H Governors, Joseph J. Bielawski from 1983 to 1984, and Edward Lecius this year for their diamond jubilee. Mr. Speaker, the Nashua Lions exemplify America's charitable spirit. Their leadership, compassion, and hard work have helped make the Gate City a wonderful place to live. I rise to express my thanks and congratulations for 75 years of caring and devoted service.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleagues will join me in paying tribute to several New Hampshire Olympians who skated their way into America's heart last month. Their dazzling talent and can-do spirit and proud patriotism gave the world a glimpse of what makes our Nation so special. As an American, I can think of few prouder moments in our history than when the U.S. women's hockey team claimed the Gold Medal for our country. As a Nation, we felt the magic of this newest miracle on ice as our heroes collected their hard-earned prize and secured their place in Olympic history. Like all great champions, Team USA gave us something greater than a victory; they inspired girls all over the world to dream new Olympic dreams and strive to achieve their goals with grace and class. As a father of such a little girl, I thank them for being such wonderful world models. Today, as New Hampshire pays tribute to Team USA, I congratulate the New Hampshire natives and Dartmouth and UNH grads who represented our State so proudly: Tricia Dunn, Katie King, Tara Mounsey, Colleen Coyne, Sue Merze, Kayrn Bye, Gretchen Ulion, Sarah Tueting. May your spirits always shine as brightly as the gold that you have won.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor an outstanding woman and worker, Rhoda Hooper, from my home state of New Hampshire. Mrs. Hooper was recently named as the ``Outstanding Older Worker'' from our fine state and I believe she serves as an example to us all that ability is truly timeless. At the age of 88, Mrs. Hooper is the type of person we would all like to be, and certainly would be lucky to hire. Her success story is both poignant and triumphant. Forced to find employment after the death of her husband, Mrs. Hooper entered the job market as an older worker without significant work experience outside the home or even a driver's license. But despite the odds seemingly stacked against her, Mrs. Hooper found work at New Boston Central School where she has fulfilled the role of office aide and so much more for the past seven years. Since she does not drive, on a pleasant day she walks the quarter mile from her home to her job where she never missed a day. Her strong work ethic seems to be matched only by the size of her generous heart. Despite demanding office duties, Mrs. Hooper takes the time to take a personal interest in each of the students. For instance, you will never find a student at New Boston Central School without mittens. She knows when any of the children are without them and makes sure they do not leave school without a hand-knit pair. If you've ever experienced a New Hampshire winter, you know just how wonderful that gift of warm mittens can be. Her co-workers call her ``a lifesaver and a joy to work with.'' The students affectionately call her ``Grandma.'' I call her a ``winner.'' Not just because she has won a richly deserved award, but because she is a role model for workers everywhere. Mrs. Hooper has overcome obstacles to achieve her goals and change her life, and in the process has enriched the lives of countless others. I extend my best wishes to Mrs. Hooper as she receives her award and urge her to keep up the good work. She is truly a special person and I am privileged to recognize her here today.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an outstanding American, Air Force Sergeant William Roy Pearson, a member of the elite Maroon Berets of the 37th Air Rescue, who died with six other servicemen when his helicopter was shot down during a rescue mission in Vietnam in 1972. Missing in action for 25 years, Sgt. Pearson was recently returned home to New Hampshire and his family to be buried in his hometown of Webster. In a time when the word hero is used to describe sports stars or movie actors, Sgt. Pearson stands out as a real-life hero. Like all true heroes, he rose to meet his challenges with a quiet courage. This brave young man, shot down just 12 days before his 21st birthday, earned in his short lifetime, a Silver Star, a Purple Heart and two Distinguished Flying Crosses. He and his squadron are credited with helping to rescue 116 servicemen. And he was a hero until the end--Sgt. William Pearson died while trying to save the life of a downed airman. I read the comments of another New Hampshire soldier who had trained and served with Sgt. Pearson and I want to share his thoughts with you. He said that he wasn't surprised that his friend died while trying to save another solider, stating: ``Billy Pearson didn't just decide that he was going to be a hero that day. It was the result of a strong family heritage and a loving home where he developed into a young man with a courageous spirit.'' Mr. Speaker, I honor that selfless, courageous spirit today. I ask that you join his family, friends, fellow soldiers and all the people of the Granite State in honoring the life and heroic efforts of Sgt. William Pearson. For too long, New Hampshire had lost one of her bravest sons, and we are very grateful to have him back.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I would only follow on to my distinguished colleague's response to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] by saying, what the media did in the Gulf war was to report what was happening and what had happened. What is key to intelligence and its effective service is to analyze all sources and to try to predict and provide the best possible advice to our policy makers. I think we have learned a lot from the Gulf war, and I think the quality of the intelligence services that we are provided today are, indeed, far superior. But the fact is, it is always easy to criticize an event after the fact. It is far more difficult to deal with the complexities of the world as they exist today and to provide leaders with predictions about what is going to happen. That is the key. But I really appreciate, Mr. Speaker, the opportunity to speak today in support of the conference report to accompany the Senate bill that authorizes funds for intelligence and intelligence-related activities. As a member of the Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence, I am particularly pleased with the bipartisan and bicameral work that we have been able to do to augment the breadth and depth of all-source analysis, as I mentioned a minute ago, in the intelligence process. Mr. Speaker, let me describe the future role of the all-source analyst by describing the past. Last month, the Central Intelligence Agency celebrated the 50th anniversary of its creation, leading us all to reflect for a moment on the grand struggles and great victories of the OSS in World War II and the CIA in the Cold War. Our chairman, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss], has spoken publicly and eloquently about the work and sacrifices made by U.S. intelligence officers from occupied France to the Soviet Union in securing these victories, in many instances submitting themselves to grave, grave danger. Those struggles, Mr. Speaker, are now history, and it is really a grand history. In their place has emerged a far more complicated, multipolar world with issues and threats that emanate not just from Berlin or Moscow, but from places like Kinshasa, Monrovia, and Chiang Mai. To inform and educate our policy makers in this new world, we require an intelligence community with diverse and global foci. To make that happen, we require an analytic core that can follow everything from the T-72 tank in the sub-Sahara to the price of poppies in the Golden Triangle. We also need those analysts to identify and direct intelligence collection that is both cost effective and useful to our needs. Mr. Speaker, I support strongly Senate bill 858, and I urge my colleagues to support us in passing this conference committee report today. I thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] for his help and guidance as the chairman of this committee.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. I thank the gentleman from Indiana for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important that we understand what we are talking about here tonight. What we are talking about having is the taxpayers of this country financing research and development from some of the wealthiest and largest corporations in this country. We have heard tonight that ATP develops technologies that private sector corporations and venture capital groups will not develop. First, this assertion contradicts the findings of the General Accounting Office study that addressed whether, in the absence of ATP funding, corporations or consortia would carry out the research anyway. According to the GAO survey, nearly half of the near winners continued their projects even though they were not awarded ATP funding. Of the entities granted ATP funds, 42 percent admitted that they would have continued their R&D project without Federal assistance, while 41 percent said they would not have. We have also heard that without ATP funding, American businesses and start-up companies will not have sufficient capital to conduct R&D into cutting-edge technologies. Mr. Chairman, we have heard many times; in 1996 the venture capital industry in this country pumped more than $10 billion into new ventures, and last year alone companies raised more than $50 billion from initial stock offerings. Let me also point out that the top four winners of ATP grants invested more than $20 billion of their own corporate resources into research and development. Remember, we are talking about $185 million versus $20 billion. That is twenty thousand million dollars that the private industry is putting in, and we are talking about $185 million. Mr. Chairman, when do we end this business of the Federal Government giving something to everybody in this country? Let us get our priorities straight. Let us support the pending amendment before us this evening.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a House resolution in support of the goals of National Mammography Day. National Mammography Day was founded by breast cancer and health care organizations to increase awareness about the critical importance of regular mammography screening and to make available education and low-cost mammograms to underserved women. The resolution complements those efforts to help increase awareness about the importance of regular mammography screening. It also recognizes the significant contributions of community organizations to women's health and urges all women to take an active role in the fight against breast cancer by all means available to them, including regular mammograms. Mr. Speaker, 180,200 women in America will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year; 43,900 will die because of the disease. We do know that early detection and prompt treatment of breast cancer could result in a third fewer breast cancer deaths each year. Mammograms are the single best method of detecting breast cancer in its earliest stages. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this resolution which I will introduce today.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, to bring to the attention of the House the importance of reauthorizing ISTEA in a fashion that recognizes and maintains the important role of public transportation. Even in my rural home State of New Hampshire, transit is a vital lifeline for many residents. In fact, a recent report entitled ``Dollars and Sense: The Economic Case for Public Transportation in America'', cites Advance Transit of Lebanon, NH, for its contribution to the economic vitality of Grafton County and neighboring Windsor County, VT. I would commend my colleagues' attention to the entirety of this report, which provides an impressive summary of mass transit's benefits. In closing, I would like to again remind my colleagues that the benefits offered by public transit, and indeed all improvements to our Nation's transportation network, will be threatened without the necessary funding to reauthorize ISTEA. As we all know, committing the revenues generated from transportation taxes to improvements to our Nation's public infrastructure, including transit, will allow our great nation to move forward with economic growth and prosperity.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the pending amendment which would reduce the OPIC account by 11.2 million. Let me emphasize this is not abolition of OPIC. This is a reduction in the administrative account. If I may quote from a letter from my distinguished colleague from California, he states here that OPIC uses taxpayers fund to provide loans, and the amendment would bring OPIC's administrative appropriation in line with its stated administrative cost. According to OPIC, administrative expenses were 20.2 million in 1994. Even though OPIC has the same insurance and loan caps as it had in 1994, it has requested a 50 percent increase in appropriations from what administrative costs were in 1994. It is a simple question of whether or not this corporation can operate with the same workload as it did in 1994, with the same administrative overhead. We have heard about the fact that the loans are going to Fortune 500 companies that only 3 percent or three loans went to small businesses and 41 went to the Fortune 500 companies. But aside from subsidizing these megacorporations, OPIC has risked over $8.7 billion in U.S. taxpayers money by underwriting risky investments in unstable regions of the world. Let me remind my friends that, should political unrest and turmoil upset these foreign markets, American taxpayers will be liable for the losses of OPIC insured corporations. I heard one of my colleagues mention earlier, remember that the FDIC and the FSLIC could never go wrong. They always would make money and we know what happened in the savings and loan fiasco. Mr. Chairman, OPIC is not contributing to reducing the deficit. The resources that come from the OPIC premiums that are received do not go into the Treasury. They go, as they should, to income, to a capital account to reduce the probability or possibility that there will be a default. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join the Americans for Tax Reform, Capital Watch, Citizens Against Government Waste, Citizens for a Sound Economy, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Friends of the Earth, National Taxpayers Union, Public Citizens and USPIRG in supporting this amendment.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I think companies such as Sunkist, Dole, Gallo, and M&M Mars are capable of smelling the coffee themselves. If there ever was a program that defines welfare for corporations, this is it, $90 million annually for corporations to conduct advertising abroad. Mr. Chairman, if we ever wanted to cast a vote to end corporate welfare, this is it. I urge an ``aye" vote on the pending amendment.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Claire and Roland, ``Beaver'' Jutras, of Peterborough, NH, who have recently been named as Parents of the Year by the National Parents Day Foundation. When Claire and Beaver Jutras are asked about their four daughters, Michelle, Christine, Natalie, and Veronica, they say that they have been blessed. It is now clear that these four girl have been blessed as well, with two loving, caring and dedicated parents. Claire and Beaver are an inspiration to all parents for their selfless devotion to their daughters. The girls are active in countless activities and organizations. As any parent knows, that means Claire and Beaver have always had to find time to provide transportation and attend games and activities, as well as being active community leaders themselves. Beaver is the director of the Peterborough recreation department, a leader in his church, and an active, committed citizen of the town. He has been recognized as a Paul Harris Fellow, the VFW man of the Year in 1981, and Citizen of the Year in 1987. He was also a member of the ConVal District School Board and teaches at his church. Claire Jutras is a special education aide at Peterborough Elementary School but worked part time while her daughters were in school so as to be able to devote her afternoons to them and their activities. She has also served as a Brownie leader, a teacher, and Eucharistic minister at their church, a preschool teacher, a recreation volunteer, and supervisor of the checklist for the town. The Jutrases are civic and spiritual leaders, athletes, scholars, and good neighbors. Families such as this one are the fabric of smalltown new Hampshire. It is an honor to be able to recognize them for their accomplishments.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, as a 1974 graduate of Dartmouth College, it is with great sadness that I bring to the attention of the House the passing of Dr. Charles (Chuck) Drake on Tuesday, July 8, 1997. Let me convey my personal sympathies to his friends and family. Furthermore, I would like to submit to the Record the text of an obituary that appeared in the New York Times so that the American people can reflect upon the accomplishments of a great American and a true scholar. [From the New York Times, July 11, 1997] Charles L. Drake, 72, Dinosaur-Theory Combatant (By Lawrence Van Gelder) Dr. Charles L. Drake, emeritus professor of earth science at Dartmouth College and a leading advocate of the theory that it was volcanic eruptions that killed off the dinosaurs, died Tuesday at his home in Norwich, Vt. He was 72. The cause was a heart attack, said his wife, Martha. In a protracted, often rancorous debate, Drake stood opposed to the school of thought that attributed the disappearance of the dinosaurs to the impact of a large meteorite 65 million years ago. In this theory, the meteorite kicked up a worldwide pall of dust that blotted out the sun and killed off many plants and animals. With Charles B. Officer, another Dartmouth geologist, Drake theorized that instead it was huge volcanic eruptions, spewing lava over 200,000 square miles of what is now India and disrupting the atmosphere with chlorine, sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide, and that led to the end of the dinosaurs' 160-million-year reign on earth. But Drake's prominence in his profession rested on far more than his role in the debate over the dinosaurs. His leadership among geologists, marked by an ability to bring together colleagues from various nations and disciplines, brought him to high positions in scientific organizations. He served from 1990 to 1992 as a member of President George Bush's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology and was also a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science; president of the 18th International Geological Congress, held in Washington in 1993; a president of the Geological Society of America and of the American Geophysical Union, and a member of committees of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Research Council and the National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. At both Columbia University and Dartmouth, Drake became chairman of his department. While at Columbia, where he spent 16 years before joining the Dartmouth faculty in 1969, he conducted pioneering research on the geologic evolution of the continental margin of the Eastern United States. Since 1970, he had conducted research at the reservoir at Lake Powell in Utah on the ecological effects of man's efforts to impound the otherwise wild Colorado River and manage water resources in an arid area. The dinosaur dispute between the volcano theorists and the meteorite-impact theorists raged through the late 1970s and the 1980s, with the meteorite side led by Nobel laureate physicist Luis W. Alvarez; his son, Walter, a geologist, and their colleagues at the University of California at Berkeley. Then, in 1994, a new theory combining the conflicting ideas was proposed: antipodal volcanism. In this theory, a speeding rock from outer space, exploding on impact with the force of millions of hydrogen bombs, would have blasted enormous shock waves through the earth. These shock waves would have coalesced at the antipode, the side of the planet opposite the impact crater, to fracture the ground, heat it and bring on volcanic outpourings. In the new theory, then, both the meteorite and its volcanic repercussions in the opposite hemisphere would have contributed to the decline of the dinosaurs. But Drake never embraced that notion, his colleague Officer said Wednesday. Charles Lum Drake was born on July 13, 1924, in Ridgewood, N.J. He received a bachelor's degree in geologic engineering from Princeton in 1948 and a doctorate in geology from Columbia in 1958. He began his teaching career in 1953 as a lecturer at Columbia, where he became a professor and, in 1967, chairman of the department of geology. In 1969, he went to Dartmouth as a professor of geology. There he served at various times as chairman of the department, dean of graduate studies and associate dean of the faculty for sciences. He retied in 1994. He is survived by his wife of 46 years, the former Martha Churchill; three daughters, Mary Layton, also of Norwich; Pace Mehling of Corinth, Vt., and Susannah Culhane of Manhattan; a brother, Thayer, of Avon, Conn., and four grandchildren.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Idaho. I want to say a couple of things. First of all, from my perspective, from the perspective of a businessman, this amendment is nothing but a pig in a poke. The fact of the matter is logs do not fly. They will not sprout wings and fly out of the forests, and somebody will have to pay for these logging roads. Now, contracts for timber are let exactly the same way a contract would be let to build a building or parking lot or anything else. There is a sale price and cost of sales, and then there is a back charge or credit the cost, especially of capital improvements, into the sale price. These roads are going to get built, unless we plan to end timber harvest completely in this country, which would be a terrible idea. We will not end up saving money, because the bids will have to be lowered in order to cover this capital expense. So let us defeat this amendment and get on with the business of approving this Interior appropriations.

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I would point out that if we were to fully fund the PILT program in fiscal year 1998, we would have an obligation of $224 million. We are talking about $132.5 million, so we are certainly not asking for everything that is really due. I just want to conclude by saying that this is a bipartisan amendment. Any time the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders] and I are producing an amendment together, Members can be sure it is bipartisan. It is an issue of fairness, an issue of giving what is due the towns, giving the towns what they are due. It is not full funding, as I said a minute ago, but Mr. Chairman, it is a step in the right direction. If Members support equity, if they support help to communities that need assistance in funding for critical services in areas where there are Federal lands, please support the Sanders-Bass amendment.

Mr. BASS. I yield to the gentleman from New Hampshire.

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment before the committee this evening, and I want to certainly thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior for having crafted a bill that has created more headaches than I would ever want to have in a given week. The question here really is, as he puts it, a question of priorities. There are over 2,000 counties in this country in 49 States, the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders] said 50 States, that suffer as a result of chronic underfunding of the payment in lieu of taxes system in this country. The amendment that my colleagues have before them today will contribute not only to the PILT issue but also the deficit reduction. Now, as other speakers have mentioned this evening, communities with significant Federal lands cannot collect the same kinds of property taxes as communities can that do not have Federal lands, and as has been mentioned before, the Federal Government moved to create a system whereby payments will be made in lieu of property taxes, but these authorizations and these commitments have been chronically underfunded. In fact, today the Federal Government only pays a little more than 60 percent of what they are obligated to pay. What is the result of this? The result is that we have for communities in the affected areas a Hobson's choice. Either they can disproportionately increase taxes in order to meet their funding obligations, or they can provide fewer services: education, fire, and other services that are so necessary for communities. I would not be standing before the Members today concerned with this amendment if it was not for the fact that this is a question of equity and fairness. We are talking about adding $19 million to the $132.5 million, which would bring the funding level up to what it was supposed to have been in fiscal year 1995, when I entered Congress.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I rise in opposition to the Sanders amendment. The implication from the discussion they have been hearing here is that intelligence in this country has been developed as a result of the cold war. Well, the cold war is yet a small part of an entire history of this country especially its strategic interests which have been around since the Constitution was written. Let me just point out that the debate here is on the amendment not the other extraneous issues. We will debate when we reach, if we do, the Conyers amendment, the issue of publicity of intelligence authorization or authorizing numbers, but let me just point out that this amendment in essence implies that the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the 6 or 7 months that it has been working on its budget has not really done its work. The fact of the matter is, as the chairman has mentioned, we have held numerous hearings, we have had plenty of hearings to discuss each and every line item as has been amply discussed. Every Member of the Congress, Republican or Democrat, could come up and examine these numbers in any level of detail. The fact of the matter is, as the chairman has mentioned, we have held numerous hearings, we have had plenty of hearings to discuss each and every line item as has been amply discussed. Every Member of the Congress, Republican or Democrat, could come up and examine these numbers in any level of detail. The fact of the matter is that it is surprising to me that any amendment that would be offered at a 10-percent reduction yesterday and then turn into a 5-percent reduction today can be called a responsible amendment. It only goes to show that when the chairman said, ``What would you cut,'' that there is no real intention here of being serious about reducing this budget. The fact is the committee has been responsible in dealing with this budget on a line-by-line basis over the last 7 months. The distinguished gentleman from Michigan calls this a Rip Van Winkle budget; I would point out that this amendment is probably a blind man's bluff amendment because we have absolutely no idea what the impact would be. That is not responsible legislating, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me the time. I rise in support of the intelligence committee authorization. I would make a couple of points. First of all, this is not a fat budget. This is a lean budget. It represents a less than 1 percent increase over what the President's request was. I would point out that as we heard the chairman of the Committee on National Security talk last week, the defense budget in this country has gone down for 13 successive years and the intelligence budget as well has suffered from these declines. I would point out that the Intelligence Committee has spent a considerable amount of time in the last 4 to 5 months examining the priorities in the Intelligence Committee. You have heard other speakers this morning talk about the need for better exploitation of all the information that we are receiving from our various collectors. Second, the need to pay more attention to the issue of human intelligence and the need to develop better human intelligence around the world, I believe that intelligence is important to this country. It has been important to this country ever since it was founded. Let me remind my colleagues that when Paul Revere road out of Boston to warn the patriots that the British were coming, he did not do it because the British told him they were coming. It was because he had a spy at the top of the Old North Church. Intelligence was important in the Civil War. Intelligence was important in the First and Second World Wars. Indeed, the Air Force was founded as a result of the need to get behind enemy lines to understand what was going on. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, intelligence in this country saves lives. It makes it possible for leaders in this country to make informed decisions about what needs to be done. It protects the national security of this Nation. It saves money in the rest of the defense budget and it strengthens this country as we move forward into the 21st century. I am pleased to be a member of this important committee. I am pleased to support this authorization.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Buyer] and the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Hilleary] concerning the need to set a schedule to get our troops out of Bosnia by a date certain. I just want to say that this position in no way diminishes my outrage at the alleged atrocities that have been committed in this region, as was so eloquently described by my colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], and it in no way diminishes my concern and commitment to ensure that our troops remain safe and secure as they defend our interests over in that area. But let me just point out that the United States has never been able to successfully mediate civil wars around the world. I would only point out, for example, what happened to us in Bosnia, what happened to us in Lebanon and, as we all know, what happened to us in Vietnam. We are good at stopping incursions and defending countries and then leaving, but we are not good at mediating civil wars, and that is precisely what is going on in the Balkan region. I know the President wants to get us out of Bosnia in a reasonable period of time, but it just is not going to be possible without the help and support of Congress. Now, the Buyer amendment gets us out in the middle of next year, which is when the President now says he is going to get us out of the area. The Hilleary amendment calls for a date certain at the end of this year with a congressional resolution thereafter. This will get us out of a situation that is costing us anywhere from $5 million to $10 million a day. We can work together with the President to end this incursion and do so in an orderly and successful fashion. So I support both the Buyer amendment and the Hilleary amendment. I think that it is time for Congress to step forward and definitively provide an exit strategy for our troop involvement in the Balkan region.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I guess, as with everyone else here today, I rise in strong support of the chairman's amendment on procurement reform. I am proud to serve as chairman of the Defense Work Group of the Committee on the Budget, and I can say that this is precisely the kind of reform that the committee has supported over the years. As one who has endorsed and introduced procurement reform legislation, I am pleased to see that the Committee on National Security is moving forward with this effort. We assume, and I think it is great, that we are going to see a reduction of 25 percent in the defense managed headquarters. Over 4 years, we will see a reduction of 42 percent in defense acquisition work force over 4 years, and it is not all at the very end. According to the amendment, it will result in a 40,000 person reduction of personnel in fiscal year 1998 alone. Now, my distinguished colleague from California and others have talked about the fact that our military strength is reduced by 33 percent and we now have 45 percent of those left in support functions, and that is too high. The amendment will save $15\1/2\ billion over 5 years and $5 billion each year thereafter. And this responsible amendment does, in fact, free up the necessary resources that we need for readiness, for modernization, and for overdue improvements in pay and benefits for military personnel. I would just like to say that I rise in strong support of this amendment and urge the House to adopt it.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Girl Scout Junior/Cadette Troop 659 of Lebanon, NH. On April 23, 1997, as part of their trip to our Nation's Capital, the girls of Troop 659 performed their Girl Scout American Flag Ceremony for me in my office in the Cannon House Office Building. These girls and their leaders, Suzi Madison and Mary Ames, represented their town, State, and country with the respect and class that the Girl Scout laws strive to uphold. Hence, I respectfully request that the copy of their ceremony, with the girls' names, be placed into the Congressional Record. Girl Scout American Flag Ceremony Anne Friedman: Red for Valor--For the courage of all women who, with a dream in their hearts, crossed the ocean to begin life anew in a free land. For the bravery of women who, with hope and faith, crossed the prairie and mountains of our vast land. For the steadfastness of these women who, through all adversities, shouldered the country's burdens to emerge as strong individuals. (Places red stripes into pot) Sarah Ames: White for Purity--For the integrity of all women whose fortitude wove the strands of diverse cultures into an integral national heritage. For the piety of all women whose faith formed the foundation upon which our country was built and continues to grow. (Places white stripes into pot) Kate Polito: Blue for Justice--For the foresight of all those women who created an atmosphere in which each of their children would develop to their fullest potential. For the perseverance of all those women who contributed their talents to further the development of our country. (Places blue rectangle into pot) Elaine Morlock: Stars for Dreams--For the dreams of the future so that the generations of tomorrow may fulfill the promise of the past 200 plus years; so that the visions of our forebears will be revitalized and the future will hold hope and promise for all generations to come. (Places white stars into pot) Lea McBain: Stirring are the stories of my stars and stripes. I symbolize the soul of America, typifying her ideals and aspirations, her institutions and traditions. (Stirs pot with spoon) Christie Wentworth: (Pulls flag out from pot) This flag, which we honor and under which we serve, is the emblem of our unity, our power, thought and purpose as a nation. Please join us in saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Holding pot: Crissa Owen. Humming ``America, the Beautiful'' in the background were: Nicole Dolloph, Jessi Madison, and Nia Perkins.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this great budget plan. I had the opportunity a few minutes ago to listen to the distinguished minority leader express his opposition to this plan. In the course of his discussion, he exhorted us to look out for the future of our children and to think about our children. And that, Mr. Chairman, is exactly why we need to adopt this plan, because this plan will get us on track to balancing the budget and reducing the debt that we are passing onto our children and our grandchildren. I came here 3 years ago to change the culture of Washington. As a new member of the Committee on the Budget, I was greeted with an administration plan, a 5-year plan that contained $150 billion deficits for all 5 years. If we add up the deficits for all of the 5 years of the plan we have before us tonight, it does not equal the deficit that we had in one fiscal year in 1992. Indeed we have before us a plan that will reduce overall spending by over almost a trillion dollars over the next decade, save Medicare, which we have been talking about now for 2 years, save this program for the next generation and implement permanent tax relief for working families and small business people, the folks I represent in the Second Congressional District. What appeared to be all but hopeless just a few years ago is now within our grasp, thanks to the undaunted efforts of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kasich], our chairman, and others who have been here longer than myself. We faced $250 billion tax increases and deficits in excess of $300 billion a year, and now we are well on the way to solving that problem. Not only will the plan we have today restore fiscal discipline for our Federal budget but it will do so using conservative economic principles: 2.1 percent rate of growth each year by the Congressional Budget Office is a tenth of a percent lower than the forecast of our budget plan a year ago. Mr. Chairman, this budget plan is the type of plan that all responsible Members of this body should support. It puts us on a track to a balanced budget by the year 2002. That is why I came to Washington in 1994.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in commemorating February 6, 1997, as National Girls and Women in Sports Day. Mr. Speaker, who can forget the thrill of seeing the U.S. women's Olympic gymnastics team win the gold medal in Atlanta last year? There is also much enthusiasm about the establishment of not one but two women's professional basketball leagues. What ties together these accomplishments are how they inspire young women across America to become involved in sports activities, to get in the game. That's the motto behind the 1997 National Girls and Women in Sports Day. I'm proud to be an honorary cosponsor of this 11th annual event. A bipartisan group of Members of Congress and Senators support an early morning walk on the Washington Mall to highlight the achievements of women athletes and draw attention to the importance of sports and fitness activities for all girls and women. National Girls and Women in Sports Day [NGWSD] is celebrated in New Hampshire and all across the country during the first Thursday of every February. It is organized by Girl Scouts of the USA, Girls Inc., the National Association for Girls and Women in Sport, the Women's Sports Foundation, and the YWCA of the USA. The First NGWSD was organized to honor Flo Hyman, the Olympic volleyball champion who brought women's volleyball in the United States to the forefront in 1984. That's when she helped lead the American team to a silver medal at the Los Angeles Olympics. Flo Hyman died suddenly while playing volleyball in Japan in 1986. She was found to have had Marfan syndrome, a connective tissue disorder that led to a faulty aorta. Annually, the Women's Sports Foundation's Flo Hyman Award is presented to a female athlete who exemplifies dignity, spirit, and commitment to excellence in women's athletics. Indeed, women's athletics are one of the most effective avenues available for women of the United States to develop self-discipline, initiative, confidence, and leadership skills. While in the past there has been little national recognition of the significance of women's athletic achievements, we are starting to see the opposite occur. Routinely, you will find larger crowds as women's college basketball games and the new women's professional basketball games will be carried on nationwide television. These occurrences can only serve to encourage young girls to become involved in sports at early age. This type of involvement in athletics, however, has less to do with recognition than with promoting lifelong habits of physical fitness. I am very proud of the many fine women athletes at our schools in New Hampshire. We all read about their accomplishments in the newspapers every week. National Girls and Women in Sports Day serves to remind us that we should encourage athletic participation and competition for women of all ages, especially in the formative years. It is my hope that we see more girls and young women get in the game this year. After all, our children, girls and boys, need strong bodies as well as strong minds. Mr. Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in supporting the 11th annual National Girls and Women in Sports Day.