Charlie Bass

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. I have come to the floor today to compliment the Committee on an excellent job balancing all the very important programs in the Omnibus Appropriations bill and particularly the Chapter of the bill that includes the matters that relate to the jurisdiction of the VA/HUD Subcommittee. I know the spending limitations necessarily imposed on the Subcommittee do not permit the Chairman and other members to address each and every issue as fully as they would like, but nonetheless the chairman has achieved a balanced and good result. I want to extend this praise to Chairman Walsh and the other members of the subcommittee. Earlier this year, a number of Members contacted the Subcommittee to express the view that the Veterans Health Administration be as proactive as possible to help ensure that disabled veterans have the most advanced prosthetic and sensory aids devices made available to them, as would be medically appropriate. I want to strongly associate myself with those views and in that regard, I was pleased to see that the committee approved the Administration's fiscal year 2003 budget request for $739.1 million for prosthetic and sensory aids devices providing an increase of $60.3 million over last year's level. I am also most appreciative of the report language the committee included on this subject. One of the exciting new prosthetic and sensory aids devices known as the IBOT was invented in my home State of New Hampshire. It is a mobility device that climbs stairs, traverses all-terrain, and balances the seated user at standing eye-level. It would be my view that some portion--at least 1 percent--of the approximately 25,000 veterans with service-connected spinal cord injuries should have access to this advanced mobility device. In fact, at the request of Congress, the VHA conducted a study of this mobility device last year that concluded with the finding that ``the subjects were unanimous in their recommendation that the Veterans Health Administration should provide IBOTS to veterans'' and that ``the IBOT could improve integration and work performance.'' Additionally as Secretary Principi has established a priority of ``restoring the capability of disabled veterans to the extent possible'' it is my expectation that such devices will be actively considered and provided to disabled veterans as medically appropriate. It is my view and the view of Members who I have discussed this matter with the Department should aggressively pursue making this mobility device and other state of the art assistive technologies available to veterans with disabilities as medically appropriate. I should state further that it is my intention to work with the Department and with Chairman Walsh over the next year to ensure that the Department does pursue this matter appropriately.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, today, Congress is failing to protect America's wildlife by shortchanging the State Wildlife Grants program. As many know, I am a strong and consistent supporter of this program, which works to preserve wildlife and save endangered species. Last year, I joined 57 colleagues in recommending $150 million in funding. Regrettably, the Fiscal Year 2003 omnibus legislation dramatically decreasing the spending level supported by the House last July. Restoration of previous funding levels for the State Wildlife Grants program, translates into greater protection of endangered species. In particular, 78 species in New Hampshire are threatened, endangered or classified as a ``species of concern.'' These include the Karner Blue butterfly, Piping Plover, and Blanding's turtle. Through the State Wildlife Grant program, the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department is able to monitor viability and health. States that monitor wildlife in a comprehensive manner are able to identify and heal declining species that, unchecked, would require ``emergency room'' care to avoid their extinction. Clearly, preventive measures save the wildlife and also taxpayer dollars eventually required for heroic measures. In 2000, when 315 of my House colleagues and I passed the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, we did not foresee the dramatic cuts to the State Wildlife Grants program. Today, we can and should commit more resources for national conservation efforts.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, in 1965, David B. Harrity began his career with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in Philadelphia, providing assistance to HUD's customers throughout Pennsylvania and southern New Jersey. In 1971, he became the first Low Rent Housing Specialist in New England, working in the Boston Regional Office with all six of the states' Housing Authorities. When HUD created the Executive Identification and Development Program in 1974, David was one of twenty-one individuals selected from a nationwide competition of more than 700 to participate in the Leadership Training. Following completion and receipt of a certificate from the Urban Executive Program of the Sloan Management School at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, David was appointed Special Assistant to the Regional Administrator in 1975. In 1978, David continued to serve the Department as the Director of Housing Development and Management of the Hartford, Connecticut, HUD Field Office. In this capacity, he led a team of staff professionals who worked closely with HUD customers, providing mortgage insurance, housing subsidies, and management oversight of housing. Responding to local need in 1988, David joined the Connecticut Department of Housing, where he administered HUD's Section 8 Existing Certificate and the Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Programs. In October of 1992, HUD Secretary Jack Kemp appointed David as Manager of the Manchester office, where David brought his customer- oriented ``can-do'' attitude to assist customers and clients in New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont. Despite the numerous reorganizations of the Department, his approach has always been to support and work with local officials to maximize HUD's program benefits for the 234 cities and towns in New Hampshire. Although the representative of a federal agency, David instilled in staff a willingness to accommodate local officials and administer HUD's programs in a manner best meeting local needs. An affirmation of his leadership skills is the recent Quality Management Review. Conducted by peers from HUD offices nationwide, the Review resulted in one of the highest overall ratings of any HUD office. David's philosophy of giving to the community is reflected in his other activities. He is President of the Board of Directors of ``The CareGivers, Inc.,'' a nonprofit organization whose mission if ``helping the frail, elderly and disabled to maintain their independence and dignity.'' In addition, David is the past President of the NH Federal Executive Association as well as an ``Ambassador'' of the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce. Furthermore, he is a Class of 2000 graduate of ``Leadership Manchester'' a program administered by the Chamber to increase understanding, coordination, and cooperation amongst community leaders. Finally, David serves as a ``Granite State Ambassador,'' greeting visitors at the NH Information Kiosks in both the airport and Downtown Manchester, and as a Board of Director of the Manchester Rotary Club.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Joint Resolution 114. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address the House today in support of the resolution before us. The decision to allow our military to use force against Iraq will be one of the most important votes we cast in this Congress, but the responsible choice to support the resolution is clear. Over the past few weeks, we have labored over the proper scope and limitations for this significant measure. The compromise language has been drafted by key House and Senate leaders, and the President. This resolution is in the best interest of America's national security. After a decade of deceit and deception, in which we have permitted a hostile dictator to repeatedly violate every agreement we have in good faith put before him, the use of force has become a necessary option. I think I speak for all members of this Congress when I say that I hope and pray that military force does not become required; however, we must prepare for all possible outcomes. This resolution protects the Congress' ability to remain fully involved in future decisions and actions in Iraq. It provides the resources for the United States to act ion the best interest of our national security, while remaining committed to generating support for a multilateral coalition. I support our President and commend his efforts to ensure that the citizen's of American do not live in fear of another tragic terrorist attack or of harm from rogue nations. With passage of this resolution, we will provide our Commander in Chief with the resources necessary to carry out his greatest task of all--providing for the continued safety of our citizens. This resolution to authorizer military action against Iraq is one that has been seriously deliberated by the President, his policy makers, and this Congress.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to enter into the Congressional Record, the speech written by the 2002 Veterans of Foreign Wars Voice of Democracy Scholarship winner, Clarissa Anderson. Reaching Out to America's Future (By Clarissa Anderson) America, the beautiful country in which we live, has a future brighter than most may see. It is the country where many families raise their children, brave people reside, intelligent people create, scientists explore, and foreigners and citizens vacation. It is a country with immense power and glory behind its name, but the future of such a place is yet to be discovered. The future of the country that we love the most is what we will make it to be. It is up to us now, who are living here today, to make the history of America one that will make those who follow behind us proud of the ones who walked before them. Many battles have been fought in the past to gain the freedoms we take for granted today, yet there are still battles to be won amongst America's own people. They are not battles over hate or differences, but they are rather battles over the hunger and the need of the people of whom we belong. The future of America lies within each American living here today. There are several civil topics that could be improved upon to make the future of our country one to be proud of. While there are rich and famous stars making the latest movies, and the most well known scientists discovering, there are still ones on the street who are in need of homes, love, care, clothing, and jobs. The able-minded and able-bodied people of America should stand up and make this country proud by making it a better place for all to live, even the less fortunate. Volunteering an hour here or there to counsel a job searcher, to serve meals to the hungry, or even to show a little love and care to a child, can make a difference slowly, one step at a time, one life at a time, a little love at a time, and a little care at a time, we will slowly create the brightest age in America's history. When Americans can truly say that the quality of living in America is better than any other country, America will have succeeded as a whole. When all Americans can feel protected not only by the laws and power of the country, but also by the care of its people, we will have succeeded. There are countless ways for a single soul to change or alter the life of another, if only a seed of compassion or care were sown within those who are able to give such things to others in need. To the future of America I would like to offer a country full of helping hands, ones that will reach out to others in need. I would like to see men and women and children alike, not only caring for their circle of friends and for their families, but also assisting the people that are in need in their towns and communities. Our country has proven to be able to accomplish many great feats and this is one feat that can be achieved within the boundaries of our own country. To conquer such a challenge we need to set ourselves aside and lose all selfishness, putting our focus on others and their needs as well. While making our changes one heart at a time, one step at a time, and one life at a time, we'll be reaching out to the future of America. Our country will be all that we've dreamed it could be. America it's the beautiful country in which we live and as Americans, we should be proud of what we accomplish as a nation, one step at a time.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for yielding to me. I have to say in the 8 years I have been here, at no time has it been more painful for me to listen to partisan rhetoric associated with an issue than has been the case in this debate. The issue of corporate governance is not a Republican issue or a Democratic issue; it is not the fault of one administration or another. Certainly the problems arose and occurred during the previous administration, but I do not blame the previous administration, any more than I blame this administration. We will not solve these problems, we will not address these problems proactively and effectively, by pointing fingers at each other and trying to accuse each other and make political hay out of a situation that demands calm, pragmatic and cooperative work on the part of everybody in this body to come up with a solution that restores confidence and creates growth and begins the process of growth again in our economy. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the work that has been done by our President and the speech that he made earlier this week in New York City. I want to pay particular attention to the exhaustive hearings that have been held by both the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations and the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection over the past 6 months. Some of these hearings were held well before the crisis erupted to the point where it is today and may have in their content given regulators significant assistance and information and a prodding, quite honestly, to move forward and to make changes that may be way overdue. Let me just say from the outset that the problem we face in corporate America is that there are a few very bad apples that have broken the law, and, as our distinguished committee chairman has said on a number of different occasions, these individuals should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and they should be sent to jail, just like any other common criminal in this country. There is no difference between stealing money from investors and robbing a bank and stealing money or shoplifting in a store, except it is more serious, and they ought to go to jail for it. Secondly, as I alluded to in the beginning of my comments, the solution to this problem should be bipartisan, bipartisan. The more we talk about whether it is a Republican's fault or a Democrat's fault, the harder it is going to be to come to a good, quick, effective solution, and the only people who are going to suffer from that are going to be consumers, investors, retirees, parents and families. So it is time we got together and cut out this partisan discussion. Thirdly, I think we should direct regulators to move expeditiously to clean up the problems that we face and provide recommendations, which we have done in two pieces of legislation, one that was marked up by the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection yesterday and another one passed earlier by the committee. But what we should not do, in my opinion, is put into statute what should be done by regulators, because when you place ideas into statute, they are there forever, effectively, for a long time, and conditions in the financial world change and you have to have flexibility to deal with problems as they arise and change things over time. We run the risk by forcing regulators to do things that we want or by passing laws that set regulations in statute that we will create problems in the economy that were unintended. Thirdly, we should be very careful not to stifle capitalism in this country, that we should not stifle the ability of the hundreds of thousands of honest entrepreneurs in this country and hard-working Americans who are trying to make a go of it and are doing it honestly. We do not want to turn every CPA in this country into a Federal bureaucrat. We do not want to have chief financial officers and executives answerable to the Federal Government instead of to their shareholders and to their boards of directors. We want to have a system of regulations in place that is flexible, accountable, transparent; no more, no less. The fact is, we cannot in Congress legislate honesty. We never have and we never will. But we can work together as Republicans and Democrats to assure that the rule of law applies to all and that corporate America is held accountable. If we do this, we will get out of this problem quickly and we will look at a bright and prosperous period of economic growth in the years to come.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to speak for a few moments about the passing of one of America's talented inventors, industrialists, and sportsmen. Bill Ruger, Sr., was a long-time friend and constituent of mine. As chairman of Sturm, Ruger and Company, the manufacturer of the world- renowned Ruger gun, Bill gained recognition as an inventor, pioneer, faithful employer, and patriotic American industrialist. The ``old man,'' as many employees and admirers lovingly called him, was the undisputed king of the American sporting industry. Building on the first sale of the Sturm Ruger standard pistol in 1949, Bill ultimately created the largest and most widely respected firearms manufacturing concern in the world. For almost 50 years, he built a business, patented numerous innovative ideas and designs, and produced products with legendary appeal and durability. His rare genius was in transforming his innovations into products that won intense customer satisfaction and, in turn, customer loyalty. Bill believed that a well- designed, well-made and reasonably priced product would always attract buyers; and the legions of sportsmen that would never hike a field with anything but a Ruger certainly proved him right. In some ways, he was the Henry Ford or Thomas Edison of the second half of the 20th century, taking manufacturing processes such as investment casting to new levels, and beating the competition fair and square through timeless quality and efficiency. He had a love for all things mechanical and taught himself most of what he would later use as the basis of his designs. In the process, he became one of the foremost authorities on automotive design and was one of the few people in the world that actually designed and built his own automobile. Bill Ruger did not build his company in order to sell out and retire, but rather to profit steadily from the success of its products. He believed in taking the long view and built lasting relationships with employees and customers. At a time when manufacturers are heading overseas and across our borders, Sturm Ruger proudly engineers and builds all of its products in the United States. His success has created great opportunity for many others, including many of my constituents; and his company continues to be a vital part of New Hampshire's economy and community. The ``old man,'' as he was called, leaves a proud legacy to many, not only in New Hampshire but in Arizona and Connecticut as well. For people who call themselves sportsmen, Bill Ruger was a name that was as celebrated and admired as Ernest Hemingway or Jack O'Connor. Although Bill will be missed by many who take regularly to the field, somehow we will know that he will be along for many more hunts. Bill viewed a well-crafted gun as a bond that connected families as it was passed from generation to generation. What he may have missed is how one of his creations bonds us to him as his genius and commitment to quality, durability, and affordability live on in perfectly cast steel and finely carved walnut. That was the gift left to us by the old man. He will be missed by many friends, admirers and employees but especially by his family. I would like to extend my condolences to the Ruger and Vogel families, especially Molly and Bill Ruger, on the passing of their father, a truly great man.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt) for their having brought this bill to the floor in a timely fashion, and I appreciate their comments which are right on the mark. This is the kind of issue that would be resolved probably in a matter of days in any school district anywhere in the country. As has been mentioned, the problem is that this particular school district crosses State lines. So, as a result, there is a special procedure whereby they can change their bylaws, and that is the procedure we are undertaking today. Both the Vermont side of the school district and the New Hampshire side want to have this different so-called ``Australian ballot system'' in place, which allows the polls, so to speak, to be open during the entire period of the school district meeting or a whole day versus just having a period of voting at the end of the meeting when most people have left. Because it requires the approval of both legislatures of the States, which has occurred, and the approval of Congress, because it is an interstate compact, that is why we are here today. Eighty-eight percent of the district voters supported this rule change. It is supported by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and I urge the House to vote affirmatively on this important measure, which needs to be sent to the Senate as soon as possible.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to bring to the attention of the United States House of Representatives Assembled, the contributions that my friend Dean Kamen has made toward improving the health, productivity, freedom, and aspirations of people around the world. I therefore request the following proclamation be made part of the permanent Congressional Record of the United State of America: Whereas, Dean Kamen and his inventions have improved the lives of millions of people around the world; and Whereas, Dean Kamen has captured the hope and imagination of all citizens who remain convinced that he will one day unlock even more secrets of physics, engineering, and biology to revolutionize the way we live; and Whereas, Dean Kamen has sought to inspire younger generations and many others the drive to study and surpass the known boundaries of humanity and science, by organizing and ceaselessly promoting For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST); and Whereas, Dean Kamen has made residents of the Great State of New Hampshire proud of his successes and appreciate his loyalty to the Granite State's way of life; and Whereas, Dean Kamen on this day has been named ``Person of the Year'' by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation New England Chapter--New Hampshire Branch; Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives that Congress congratulates Dean Kamen on his award and thanks him for his many contributions to our society. On this date, at the House of Representative, in Washington, D.C.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I was regrettably absent on Friday, June 21, 2002, and consequently missed a recorded vote on H.R. 4931. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 247.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk for a minute or two about an issue that may not be the most pressing issue before the Nation today, but it is one that is, nonetheless, important for the historical nature of the U.S. Capitol and its grounds. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) and I have been made aware recently that the oldest tree on the Capitol grounds may be cut down on the recommendation of the Architect of the Capitol and his arborist advisers. Frankly, despite earlier assurances to Congress that many trees planted by Frederick Law Olmsted, one of the Capitol's earliest landscape architects, would be saved, far too many trees have been sacrificed for this new visitor's center. The oldest tree, which, by the way, is right outside the door here, if you go outside the door and look at about 1 o'clock you will see it there, it was planted by Frederick Law Olmsted, as I said. He was the Capitol's earliest Architect. We were told it would be saved. Now, this tree is a rare English Elm, reputed to be over 175 years old, and it was never slated in the original plans to be removed. In fact, earlier assessment by a notable national tree company employed by the Architect of the Capitol said that it should be preserved. Reports now that the tree is ``dangerous'' seem to have little factual foundation, other than a more recent report by the same arborist. Furthermore, other old trees on the Capitol grounds are no more or less dangerous than this elm tree. I would point out that recently these fences have been built around these trees, and it is impossible for the tree really to be dangerous, unless some kind of typhoon moved through. Far more alarming to the tree's health is the news that the visitor's center contractor wants to dig a 60 foot hole at the base of the elm along the drip line, to dig a hole for whatever purpose, for a possible staging area for construction, or as part of the new paved area for temporary parking for Members of Congress. I think this is totally indefensible, the idea we would cut down one of the oldest trees on the Capitol grounds so that Members of Congress can have a temporary parking place while they are building the visitor's center. I hope my colleagues will join the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) and me in urging that this tree be saved. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman, and I rise in strong support of the House budget resolution and particularly for the provisions that it addresses in the issue of concurrent pay for veterans. For over 100 years, soldiers disabled in the line of duty have had their retirement pay offset by disability payments. This is the only group of individuals that suffers from this tragic inequity, and now I am pleased to report that we have included in this budget provisions that will provide over half a billion dollars to start addressing this offset issue, a total funding over 5 years of over $5.8 billion. In the 7 years that I have served on this committee, 8 now, we have never been able to do this and we do now for the first time in that period of time that I have been on the committee. I would also note that these provisions have the strong support of the American Legion, the VFW and these other national VSO's. Mr. Chairman, this is a ground-breaking provision in this budget. I urge that the Congress support the pending budget resolution.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, a little more than 2 months ago, America was visited by an unspeakable horror. For the first time in more than a century and a half, this Nation was attacked viciously on its own home territory. In the weeks since September 11, the Nation has mourned, has expressed anger, has been anxious, concerned, but also very generous. The American spirit has reached levels that now stands as a symbol of this Nation's greatness and ability to support a just cause, the relief of the victims of these tragedies and their families. But we have also seen the darker side of humanity. Reports of people using this tragedy and the generous American spirit for their own gain have appeared. The Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission and the States attorneys general have some powers to prosecute those engaged in fraud and deceptive practices, but we must make it clear that we will severely punish those who aim to take advantage of America's charity or an organization's good name during an emergency. Congress must also make sure that consumers are not inundated with false and deceptive claims about goods and services that would exploit the circumstances of an emergency or disaster. Whether it is selling Cipro or other drugs under false information or offering fraudulent terrorist insurance, these practices must carry a penalty commensurate with their nature. We cannot let the detestable actions of so few mar the pride and patriotism we all share over the phenomenal generosity and outpouring of support from across America and the world. We cannot let the fear and anxiety of our citizens be preyed upon by scam artists peddling their cheats and swindles. I have no doubt that the victims, their families and friends and all Americans are as humbled as I am with the response of this country. Now we need to ensure that those who would abuse this determined American spirit are equally staggered at our response. The American Spirit Fraud Prevention Act would double the penalties the FTC could levy during times of presidentially declared emergencies and disasters if the offending action aimed to exploit the crisis. These times, sadly, occur more often than one might think, and the attempts to profit from them follow just as regularly. All hope of profit and gain must be removed from the equation of these people. I just want to say that this effort would not have been possible without the support of the bill's coauthor, my friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal); the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin); the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Stearns); the ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns); and the entire Committee on Energy and Commerce. I thank you all for your help with this, and I urge its prompt passage.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I was regrettably absent on Wednesday, October 17, 2001, and consequently missed a recorded vote on H.R. 390. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 390.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. I was glad to yield to my friend from New York to make it possible to bring this important piece of legislation to the floor tomorrow. It is important. It is important because Americans demand, expect and will get aviation safety with the passage of the bill we are going to consider tomorrow. My good friend from Arizona has talked at some length about the differences between the Senate and the House bill, and they are significant, and they are important, and it is critical that this body adopt the Mica-Young version of the bill, because it does what it needs to do, it does it quickly, and it does it effectively. There are four aspects of this bill that are important to understand. Number one, the Republican bill provides for real safety. It has enhanced security screening by creating Federal standards, Federal control, Federal supervision, but it does it quickly and it does it without months and possibly years of training that it would take to get personnel in place under the bill passed by the Senate. It also provides for accountability. It provides for a zero tolerance policy for every federally certified baggage screener. It provides for quality, incorporating the very best manager practices by hiring qualified baggage screeners and going through thorough background checks and investigation. We have heard a lot of rhetoric about how the status quo will continue under the Republican plan. Well, my friend from Arizona from the very beginning has pointed out the system will be different, the system will be reliable, and the system we are proposing will work. Let me give Members some observations about where I see airport security at this point. As one who myself, and I think almost everybody else in this body, we are frequent fliers and we fly back and forth to our districts every week. The reality of it is that airport security today, in my opinion, is dysfunctional. You have huge lines for checking bags, and little or no baggage screening. You have enormous lines in some concourses for security screening. I was up at an airport in the area the other day, I paced it off, there was a 1,000-foot line to get through two security screening areas. There were three available, but only two were running. The airlines need to get the business customer back. Otherwise, this body and this government is going to be subsidizing the airline industry indefinitely. If we want exactly what we have to do, 1,000- foot lines, dysfunctional airports, vote for the substitute motion, vote for the Senate bill, because what it does is it institutes a system which is totally federally employed that will not be flexible, will not be able to reflect the realities of having to provide efficient, quick, but effective safety procedures at airports, and we will have what we have today indefinitely. We will wait for 4 or 5 years for new rules to come to make minor changes that will make airline systems run better. Under the Republican plan, or under the plan that I support, there is Federal supervision, Federal rule making, Federal standards, but the airport authorities can adjust the system to reflect for the size of the airport or the type of system or the way the building is constructed. The employees can be trained where they qualify from the existing workforce, and it happens quickly. But what is most important about this is that the airlines will have some input in being able to attract the business customer back by offering innovative ways for frequent fliers to get from one side of the airport to the other. Let me give an example. If you fly two or three times a week and you are willing to undergo a complete background check, maybe a retinal scan and other things, maybe you can get to your gate more quickly than somebody who does not fly very much at all or somebody that does not want to divulge any personal information. This kind of a concept, which could easily be implemented under the Republican plan, is unlikely to be practical under the Senate plan because the Senate plan is a one-size-fits-all approach to a problem that differs in every single airport. I hope that Americans understand that Democrats, Republicans, the Senate, the House, liberals, conservatives, we all share the same objective, and that objective is moving forward in a productive manner to provide real, serious, effective and quick airport safety. I would suggest to my friend from Arizona and to the Speaker that our plan will do it, and it will do it right.

Mr. BASS. If the gentleman will yield further briefly, when you have a system that applies a block standard at this point and a block standard at that point, you tend to get situations that do not work in some instances. Let me give one example. I note with some dismay that airport parking lots now that are within 300 yards, I believe, of the terminal, are blocked off. In some instances, in the Manchester Airport in New Hampshire, that means that two-thirds of the entire parking area is blocked off and cannot be used and you cannot go around. I can go through the details. But the fact is that if we continue with the system that has been implemented now, these airports are going to continue to be dysfunctional. We need to have a system that applies the same standards to all the airports, big or small, so we do not have the situation discussed earlier where we do not have people properly checked getting into a properly screened area, but, secondly, these airport authorities need to get waivers and be able to make the airports work.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote 393. I would like the Record to show that had I been present I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I do have an amendment to offer. I had planned to offer a couple of amendments having to do with funding for IDEA, special education. But I have to say that within the constraints of the budget, the distinguished subcommittee chairman, my friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), has done an extraordinary job in raising funding for this critical program by $1.375 billion. I believe that is the greatest increase that we have had from this body since I have been here. It does not meet the objective of reaching 40 percent, or our mandate, within a specified period of 5 or even 10 years, but it recognizes, and certainly it is an extraordinarily commendable effort on the part of this subcommittee, and expresses the intent of this subcommittee chairman to meet this goal as quickly as possible. We do have opportunities on the horizon. IDEA will be up for reauthorization next year. It is my hope that we can combine the process of reauthorization with an effort to set this Congress on a path to meeting the 40 percent funding goal in a set period of time. I thank the chairman for his hard work in this area.

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

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of the Sherwood Amendment to permanently extend the Northeast Dairy Compact. This Compact is critical to the survival of small dairy farms not only in my district in New Hampshire but also throughout the Northeast. Its operation provides a safety net for New Hampshire farmers, and it ensures a stable supply of fresh, local milk for consumers. In my district, rural communities are profoundly affected by the survival of dairy farms, which provide jobs, purchase goods and services, and preserve dwindling agricultural land. The Northeast Dairy Compact has kept these farms in business for the good of farmers and consumers. Dairy compacts neither cost the federal government nor allow retail milk prices to increase disproportionately. Congress should listen to the farmers, taxpayers, and the twenty-five states, which have passed compact legislation, and support the permanent extension of the Northeast Dairy Compact.

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. A lot has been made about the fact that this amendment would take land out of production. Unfortunately, it is a reality in my State of New Hampshire that farms are really not economic. I would only draw to your attention a farm like Sunny Crest Farm in Concord, New Hampshire, which has benefited from the farmland protection program and can now produce apples for the foreseeable future instead of houses. These programs are critical to the maintenance of a very sad farming situation in the Northeast. I hope that the Congress will adopt this important amendment.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the New England Council as they celebrate their 76th Anniversary of being a regional voice for the people of New England. For over seventy-five years, the New England Council has been instrumental in uniting the region's business and political leaders to discuss and shape public policies and programs that advance the economic well-being of the region. As a non-profit alliance of schools, hospitals, corporations, public agencies and other organizations throughout New England, the Council has worked diligently to promote economic growth and quality of life in the six-state region. I commend your leadership in looking for regional solutions on issues including energy, workforce development, health care, transportation and privacy. Under the leadership of Jim Brett and the Council's esteemed Board of Directors, the Council has played a significant role in both providing a forum and in advocating an agenda that addresses those issues impacting New Englanders and the regional economy. I applaud the Council's efforts to promote the economic growth of New England and to improve the quality of life for those who live throughout the region. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the 76th Anniversary of the New England Council and in wishing the Council continued success as it faces the challenges and possibilities of the 21st Century.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, today I lend my thoughts and prayers, along with those of my colleagues, fellow Americans, and all our friends around the world, to the victims of these terrorist assaults and their families, a number of whom come from New Hampshire. But even as we work now to recover from these attacks--to bury the dead, to comfort the survivors and families, and to rebuild--we must turn our attention to the future. In the days and weeks ahead we will of course take steps to increase the security and safety of Americans in travel and in their places of work and to bring those responsible to justice. We must remember, however, that no system of security is invincible. So long as terrorists are able to organize, finance, communicate, train, and execute such operations, this country and our allies will always be at risk. The time has now come to recognize that a new defining doctrine must be embraced: that no safe harbor can be allowed for terrorists. No country can be allowed to tolerate the presence of terrorists or their supporters or assets within their borders. Such states must be held to the same level of account as the terrorists themselves, and we must use every means necessary to drive home this point to them. With no place to hide, no place to train and organize, no place to keep their assets, the power of terrorists will be critically undermined. This doctrine of no safe harbor will be the greatest legacy for the victims of these terrorist attacks; that truly everything will be done to ensure that we are never so vulnerable again.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the pending resolution.

Mr. BASS

Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Bono amendment. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Bono Amendment to H.R. 4. Today we have an opportunity to advance the use of renewable and alternative energy products. The Energy Sun program has significant environmental and energy security benefits. I support extending the Energy Sun label to renewable and alternative energy products including solar, wind, biomass, and distributed energy. Specifically, I believe new technologies, like that of the stirling heat engine, will go far to reduce pollution and our dependence on dangerously strained electric power grids. Now is the time to recognize and encourage the use of products and technologies that will improve our homes, our communities, and our environment.