Doug Bereuter

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 22) honoring Czech Republic President Vaclav Havel.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 22, the resolution under consideration.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This Member rises today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 22, a resolution honoring Czech Republic President Vaclav Havel. The resolution was introduced by the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), and this Member is pleased to be an original cosponsor. This resolution seeks to recognize, congratulate, and honor President Havel for a combination of 13 years of extraordinary service, first as President of Czechoslovakia and second, since 1993, as President of the Czech Republic. The Constitution of the Czech Republic allows a president to serve only two consecutive 5-year terms, and the United States House of Representatives would like, therefore, to honor President Havel upon the occasion of the end of his term of service on February 2 of this year. Nearly 13 years ago, on February 21, 1990, President Vaclav Havel addressed a joint session of the United States Congress in this very room. This occasion was less than 4 months after his last arrest by what he characterized as ``the most conservative Communist government in Europe,'' and less than 2 months after Vaclav Havel had been elected President of Czechoslovakia, in December 1989, by a parliament still dominated by members of the Communist party. During his inspirational speech to the joint session of Congress, President Havel said many things that made many Members of Congress realize they were not listening to just another political leader of a foreign country. President Havel, in his speech, was discussing what his country, and all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that had suffered throughout the Cold War, could learn from the United States. He also suggested that perhaps his country could offer something to the United States. In his speech, he stated ``We too can offer something to you: our experience and the knowledge that has come from it. This is a subject for books, many of which have already been written and many of which have yet to be written. I shall therefore limit myself to a single idea. The experience I'm talking about has given me one great certainty: Consciousness precedes being, and not the other way around, as Marxists claim.'' In explaining that axiom, Havel went on in his speech to explain that: ``The only genuine backbone of all of our actions, if they are to be moral, is responsibility. Responsibility is something higher than our family, my country, my company, my success. Responsibility to the order of being where all of our actions are indelibly recorded and only where they will be improperly judged. The interpreter or mediator between us and this higher authority is what is traditionally referred to as human conscience. If I subordinate my political behavior to this imperative mediated to me by my conscience, I can't go far wrong.'' He went on to say that it is this responsibility dictated by his conscience which caused him to ultimately decide, after resisting for a long time, to accept the burden of political responsibility. In other words, he saw it as a responsibility to accept the presidency of Czechoslovakia. In a related noteworthy admonition to intellectuals in every country he reminded that ``If the hope of the world lies in human consciousness, then it is obvious that intellectuals can't go on forever avoiding their share of the responsibility for the world and hiding their distaste for politics under an alleged need for independence.'' As a playwright and essayist, Vaclav Havel was a leading figure of the dissident movement against the totalitarian system of the Communist regime in Czechoslovakia. He was a founder of Charter 77, the underground movement seeking freedom of expression and association, and the basic protection of civic and human rights. He wrote the essay, ``The Power of the Powerless,'' in which he called upon ordinary citizens to live in truth against a totalitarian regime. For his various civic reform efforts, he received multiple prison sentences and served a total of almost 5 years imprisoned by the Communist regime. During the events of November-December 1989, which have come to be known as the Velvet Revolution, Vaclav Havel helped form the Civic Forum, a broad coalition of dissident groups, which was the first legal opposition movement in Communist Czechoslovakia. By the end of that year, through a ``bloodless revolution,'' 41 years of Communist dictatorship peacefully came to an end when Vaclav Havel was elected President. Now, Mr. Speaker, I count it a great personal privilege and honor to represent perhaps more Czech-Americans than any Member of Congress. Most of them came to the rolling prairies of Nebraska and the prairie States in the 1870s and 1880s to own their own land and to farm the soil. Other Czechs and Slovaks came to the larger cities of the Midwest, places like Omaha, during the first two decades of the 20th century. While their Americanization had occurred several generations ago, these Czech-Americans continued to follow closely, and I would say with great anguish, the totalitarian conditions of people in their old homelands of the past. It was, therefore, a particular pleasure for me to watch these Czech-Americans gather in the public meeting places, the restaurants, the bars, and in their homes to watch with amazement and great pride on television the rapid and peaceful Velvet Revolution, which finally ended the Communist stranglehold, to reclaim the democracy that Czechoslovakia had enjoyed only for the brief period between two World Wars. Vaclav Havel epitomized this return to Czech democracy for both his countrymen and the Americans who watched and marveled at the success of the Velvet Revolution and Havel's leadership, which demonstrated the very best in intellectual and humane leadership. Since then, President Havel has been an extraordinary politician, leading his country and the countries of Eastern Europe into a future of freedom, democracy, and security. He was probably the foremost proponent in Europe of allowing the former countries of the Warsaw Pact to join NATO. On March 12, 1999, his vision was made a reality when the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary became members of the Alliance. And just last November, his country was honored by hosting the first NATO Summit held behind the former Iron Curtain in Prague, where seven additional countries of Eastern Europe were invited to join the Alliance. Because parliamentarians from the 19 NATO countries have honored me with the leadership in the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, I was privileged to be present at the NATO Prague Summit in November of last year. I think it was noteworthy that President Havel, in his host capacity as the dean of all the NATO heads of state and heads of government in length of service, was accorded an auspicious degree of affection and respect by his peers and other leaders of the Free World. That acclaim reflected not just his leadership for the Czech Republic but also recognized the moral leadership he has provided for all of the countries of Eastern and Central Europe that emerged from communism and, indeed, for the NATO Alliance as a whole. On January 30 of this year, just 2 days before he was to step down after 13 years as President, he was one of eight European heads of state or government from NATO countries to sign a letter expressing continued solidarity and support with and to the United States in the international fight against terrorism and for possible action against Iraq. The importance of that letter really cannot be overestimated, since it stood in mark contrast to the dissenting positions of four countries, France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg. Two sentences sum up the essence of that letter and what is most essential in the transatlantic relationship. The statement said: ``The real bond between the U.S. and Europe is the values we share: democracy, individual freedom, human rights, and the rule of law. Today, more than ever, the transatlantic bond is a guarantee of our freedom.'' Vaclav Havel has been called an artist, an intellectual, the poet of democracy, and an international icon of integrity, wisdom and moral seriousness, and even ``the most extraordinary statesman who emerged from the struggle to overthrow communism in Eastern Europe.'' President Havel likes to say that in November 1989 when he was first told that he had been nominated as a candidate for the office of President of Czechoslovakia, he thought it was a joke. He thought who was he to be President of this new democracy. This Member is here today to thank President Havel for saying yes and accepting the office of President, including the challenge of politics and public service. By simply choosing to continue to fight for the ideals he fought for during the Cold War, democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law, by working tirelessly to include the new central and eastern European democracies into Europe and the alliance, and through his efforts directed toward reconciliation with the old enemies, he has elevated politics and public service, for his country, for Europe, for the trans-Atlantic alliance, and for the world. Mr. Speaker, this Member will quote from President Havel's first New Year's address to his nation, the newly free Czechoslovakia, on January 1, 1990. President Havel spoke to his fellow citizens about the legacy of over 40 years of the Communist totalitarian system. He said, ``It would be quite unreasonable to understand the sad legacy of the last 40 years as something alien, something bequeathed to us by some distant relative. On the contrary, we must accept this legacy as a sin we committed against ourselves. If we accept it as such, we will understand that it is up to us all, and up to us alone, to do something about it. We cannot blame the previous rulers for everything, not only because it would be untrue but also because it could blunt the duty each of us faces today, that is, the obligation to act independently, freely, reasonably, and quickly. Let us make no mistake: the best government in the world, the best parliament and the best president in the world cannot achieve much on their own. And it would also be wrong to expect a general remedy to come from them alone. Freedom and democracy require participation and therefore responsible action from us all.'' Mr. Speaker, this Member joins his colleagues in paying tribute to Vaclav Havel for the vital, moral leadership and idealism he has brought to his service for the Czech Republic and to the community of Western democracies. For his countrymen and all of us in democratic nations, this leadership and focus on participatory democracy is in the best traditions of those heroes of the American democracy that we honor in this great capital city, Jefferson, Madison and others among our Founding Fathers. I urge support for the resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to join in commending the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) for his articulate statement and his initiative. This matter would have been taken up last week if it had not been for the schedule change because of the Columbia disaster. I urge strong support by all the Members for this resolution.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor of the resolution, this Member wishes to add his strong support for H. Res. 25, which supports efforts to encourage more individuals to become mentors. In addition to raising awareness, a key provision is to commend those who give their time and talents to support mentoring initiatives. This Member would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Boehner], the Chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], the ranking member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce for bringing this important resolution to the House Floor today; this issue is very timely as January 2003 is National Mentoring Month. This Member would also like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Osborne] for sponsoring H. Res. 25 and for his personal interest in establishing mentoring opportunities nationwide. Many children throughout the United States face difficult situations--and when matched with a caring and responsible adult, positive results ensue. Research has shown that mentoring benefits young people in a positive manner by increasing school attendance, improving rates of secondary school graduation and college attendance, decreasing involvement with drugs and alcohol, and reducing violent behavior. Mr. Speaker, in closing, this Member urges his colleagues to support H. Res. 25.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to commend to his colleagues three editorials from the Omaha World-Herald. First, the editorial from the December 11, 2002, edition of the paper, entitled ``Kurds set an impressive example,'' correctly commends the economic, political, and social progress made by the Kurds in northern Iraq despite Saddam Hussein's concerted and well-documented efforts to annihilate Iraq's Kurdish population. Second, the editorial from the December 16, 2002, edition of the Omaha World-Herald, entitled ``Behind Mexico's farm woes,'' encourages Mexico to pursue new farm policies which fully utilize market opportunities created through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) rather than simply continuing to blame U.S. farm subsidies for Mexico's continued ag sector problems. Finally, the editorial from the January 2, 2003, edition of the paper, entitled ``Open trade, open meetings,'' offers support for U.S. proposals to increase transparency within the World Trade Organization (WTO). Kurds Set an Impressive Example The Kurdish area of Iraq shows the progress that is possible once a dictator is freed from a dictator's rule. U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel visited that zone last week, and he was on the mark in saying the Kurdish area has the potential to serve as a model for what a post-Saddam Iraq could become. Saddam Hussein's regime devastated the Kurd's territory in the 1980s but lost its grip on the area in 1991 as a result of the Gulf War. Economic development began to surge there in 1996, when the United Nations began channeling a set portion of Iraq's oil revenues to the Kurds. Saddam's government is able to short-circuit or delay various development projects, but the Kurds have still made impressive progress. Here is how Barham Salih, prime minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government, described that improvement, in an opinion essay this week in The Washington Post: ``In 11 years we have rebuilt some 4,000 villages, set up two universities and opened more than 2,700 schools. Protected by U.S. and British air power, we have created an environment of freedom unique in Iraqi history, in which Kurds, Turkomens, Assyrian Christians and Arabs enjoy cultural and political rights. My home city of Sulaimani alone has more than 130 media outlets, including 13 TV stations and dozens of newspapers--as well as unrestricted access to the Internet and satellite TV.'' The currency in Kurdish-controlled areas is worth more than 100 times its counterpart in the rest of Iraq, the San Francisco Chronicle notes. A Chronicle article described the area's newly paved highways as well as new hotels and open- air restaurants. The child mortality rate among the Kurds, the Chronicle points out, is about 45 percent less than that for the rest of Iraq. Such a contrast strongly suggests that Saddam's decisions in allocating medical resources are a major factor in bringing misery to average Iraqis. The Kurds' progress shouldn't be exaggerated. Many Kurds eke out only a modest living, and the area's political system still needs to achieve the orderliness and relative comity associated with democratic systems. On balance, though, the Kurds' achievement after only a few years offers tremendous hope. In certain respects, it can be a role model not just for Iraq but for many countries in that part of the world.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the legislation. I am very pleased to say that it is a 1-year extension, only because it is important that we address the reforms that are necessary for our own constituents and for some of the very important matters brought to us by the managers of the National Flood Insurance Program and FEMA. During most of my time here in Congress, I have been working on reform legislation for the flood insurance program. I would say it is overdue. With Mr. Kennedy from Massachusetts, we often tried to make some reforms. We were successful in part. In recent years, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) and I have been working on this subject. We have reintroduced legislation today. We were happy to work with Mr. Bentsen, the former Member from Texas, and we look forward to working with all Members, such as the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), who has played a key role and has had a great interest in this subject. This is important legislation which the chairman has identified for work this year, so I hope their input will come to us. Mr. Speaker, again, I rise in strong support of the legislation and urge its passage.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would like to highlight the important work of the Trade Development Agency (TDA). The TDA is an independent U.S. Government Agency that promotes U.S. exports in long- term, commercially sustainable projects in developing countries. Additionally, the TDA is unique because it is small, flexible, and can respond quickly. As a result, TDA is one of the first agencies to enter new markets. Moreover, TDA also makes the host country an important part of identifying priority developmental needs. The TDA funds various forms of technical assistance, training grants, feasibility studies, orientation visits, and business workshops. To illustrate their work, in September of this year, TDA signed a grant with the National Bureau to Combat Desertification, State Forestry Administration in the People's Republic of China for $244,200. The Grantee selected Valmont Industries, Inc., a Nebraska company, to be the contractor for this study. The goal of the study is to help prevent and reduce desertification in Western China, thereby improving the air quality in Beijing and other Western areas and improving the areas immediately surrounding the desert. The study will examine Valmont's pivot irrigation technologies and how they can be utilized to best prevent the desert from expanding. Furthermore, under the administration of President Bush, the Director of the TDA has refocused its priorities so that program activities support important policy initiatives and objectives, such as reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. For example, TDA continues its cooperation with Afghan officials to address infrastructure, pipeline, airport, hotel development and telecommunications initiatives. Another priority of the TDA is to support program activities in Africa. To demonstrate this, in October 2001, President Bush announced the establishment of an Africa Regional Trade Development Office under TDA. In July 2002, TDA opened an office in South Africa, which will help develop infrastructure and trade opportunities for the continent. For instance, in Nigeria, TDA allocated funds for the development of fertilizer production, power generation and agricultural irrigation. It has come to my attention that the demand for TDA's services during FY2002 has been tremendous. Moreover, in light of priorities such as Afghanistan, the demands on TDA are expected to increase in FY2003. Mr. Speaker, a little money goes a long way at TDA. As a result, this Member urges his colleagues to continue to support TDA.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today to express his support for the rule on the conference report for the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (H.R. 333). This Member is an original cosponsor of H.R. 333, which the House first passed on March 1, 2001, by a vote of 306-108. This Member is pleased that the House and Senate conferees have finally reached an agreement on bankruptcy reform which President George W. Bush is expected to sign. It is important to note that bankruptcy reform bills passed both the House and the Senate in the 105th and 106th Congresses. In the 105th Congress, the House passed a bankruptcy reform conference report, while the Senate failed to pass the conference report. In the 106th Congress, former President Bill Clinton pocket vetoed a bankruptcy reform conference report. During this Congress, the Conference Report was delayed for too long over of all things, a tenuous connection drawn to the subject of abortion clinics by conferees from the other body. First, this Member would thank the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Gegas], for introducing the original House bankruptcy legislation, H.R. 333. This Member would also like to express his appreciation to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner], the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, for his efforts in bringing this conference report to the House Floor for consideration. This Member supports the conference report for the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act for numerous reasons; however, the most important reasons include the following: First, this Member supports the provision in the conference report for H.R. 333 which provides for a means testing, needs-based, formula when determining whether an individual should file for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Chapter 7 bankruptcy allows a debtor to be discharged of his personal liability for many unsecured debts. In addition, there is no requirement that a Chapter 7 filer repay many of his or her debts. However, Chapter 13 bankruptcy filers commit to repay some portion of his or her debts under a repayment plan. Some Chapter 7 filers actually have the capacity to repay some of what they owe, but they choose Chapter 7 bankruptcy and are able to walk away from these debts. For example, the stories in which an individual filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and then proceeds to take a nice vacation and/or buys a new car are too common. Moreover, the status quo is costing the average American individual and family increased costs for consumer goods and credit because of the amount of debt which is never repaid to creditors. As a response to these concerns, the needs-based test of the conference report of H.R. 333 will help ensure that high income filers, who could repay some of what they owe, are required to file Chapter 13 bankruptcy as compared to Chapter 7. This needs-based system takes a debtor's income, expenses, obligations and any special circumstances into account to determine whether he or she has the capacity to repay a portion of their debts. Second, this Member supports the additional monthly expense items that are exempted from consideration under the needs-based test which determines, under the conference report of H.R. 333, whether a person can file either a Chapter 7 or 13 version of bankruptcy. These expenses include the following: reasonable expenses incurred to maintain the safety of the debtor and debtor's family from domestic violence; an additional food and clothing allowance if demonstrated to be reasonable and necessary; and actual expenses for the care and support of an elderly, chronically ill, or disabled member of the debtor's household or immediate family. Third, this Member supports the permanent extension of Chapter 12 bankruptcy in the conference report of H.R. 333 since it allows family farmers to reorganize their debts as compared to liquidating their assets. Using the Chapter 12 bankruptcy provision has been an important and necessary option for family farmers throughout the nation. It has allowed family farmers to reorganize their assets in a manner which balances the interests of creditors and the future success of the involved farmer. If Chapter 12 bankruptcy provisions are not permanently extended for family farmers, its expiration on January 1, 2003, would be another very painful blow to an agricultural sector already reeling from low commodity prices. Not only will many family farmers have no viable option but to end their operations, it likely will also cause land values to plunge. Such a decrease in value of farmland will affect the ability of family farmers to obtain adequate credit to maintain a viable farm operation. It will impact the manner in which banks conduct their agricultural lending activities. Furthermore, this Member has received many contracts from his constituents supporting the extension of Chapter 12 bankruptcy because of the situation now being faced by our nation's farm families. It is clear that the agricultural sector is hurting and by a permanent extension of the Chapter 12 authorization, Congress can avoid one more negative possibility. Lastly, this Member supports the provision in the conference report of H.R. 333 which requires that people convicted of a felony or who owe a debt from a securities fraud violation in the five years before filing for bankruptcy cannot claim an unlimited homestead exemption. Currently, there are only six states, including Texas and Florida, which provide unlimited bankruptcy protection for a person's home. Nebraska is not one of those six states as it has a maximum homestead exemption of $12,500. This Member believes that this provision in the conference report is imperative in light of the recent corporate scandals at Enron and WorldCom. For example, this provision would apply to the $7 million penthouse in Houston of Kenneth Lay, the former chairman of Enron, if he both files for personal bankruptcy in the future and owes a debt due to any conviction of securities fraud. In addition, this provision may also be relevant to Scott D. Sullivan, the former chief financial officer of WorldCom, who is building a $15 million mansion in Boca Raton, Florida. In closing, for these aforementioned reasons and many others, this Member urges his colleagues to support the conference report of H.R. 333.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, on November 14, 2002, this Member unavoidably missed two roll call votes. On Roll Call Number 481 (motion to recommit on H.R. 5708, a bill to reduce pre-existing PAYBO Balances), this Member would have voted ``no.'' On Roll Call Number 482 (final passage of H.R. 5708), this Member would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today to express his support for the conference report of the Terrorism Risk Protection Act (H.R. 3210). This conference report will help ensure that businesses are able to acquire property and casualty insurance while still providing taxpayer protection against terrorist losses. This Member is pleased that the House and Senate conferees have reached an agreement on terrorism insurance which President President George W. Bush is expected to sign. This Member is a cosponsor of H.R. 3210, which the House first passed on November 29, 2001, by a vote of 227-193. This Member would first like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the Chairman of the House Financial Services committee, for both introducing this legislation and for his efforts in bringing this conference report to the House Floor. Additional appreciation is expressed to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) who also played a crucial role in crafting the conference report on H.R. 3210. Moreover, this Member would also like to thank the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), the Ranking Minority Member of the Financial Services Committee, for his bipartisan cooperation and assistance on this conference report. The uncertainty caused by the terrorist events on September 11, 2001, has resulted in the possibility of serious problems for the insurance industry and the insured from additional severe terrorist attacks. To illustrate this, reinsurance companies provide insure against massive losses for insurance companies. Since this terrorist attack, many primary companies, because they cannot receive reinsurance, have sent notice cancellations to businesses indicating that they will not receive coverage for losses caused by terrorist activities. If both small and large businesses continue to be unable to receive insurance, it will contribute to the further instability of the American economy. Insurance provides a very important element of the stability needed by businesses to continue functioning and investing and for bankers to continue lending to businesses. As a Member of the House Financial Services Committee, which has jurisdiction over the important elements of the limited Federal role in commercial insurance, this Member supports this conference report for the following two reasons. First, obviously it helps ensure that commercial insurance continues to be available for businesses--and available at affordable costs. Second, it provides necessary taxpayer protections against possible severe terrorist losses to businesses. Under this conference report, a temporary Federal terrorism insurance program would be established within the Treasury Department. Under this program, Federal funds would be provided to property and casualty insurance companies when losses reach the ``trigger'' level. In particular, Federal funds would pay 90 percent of the terrorism-related losses of insurance companies that exceed 7 percent of the company's premiums in 2003; 10 percent of a company's premiums in 2004; and 15 percent of a company's premiums in 2005. Each insurance company would pay for 100 percent of insured losses up to those thresholds and 10 percent of the losses above those levels. This Federal terrorism insurance program would cover industry-wide losses up to $100 billion per year. It is also very important to note that this conference report provides for the mandatory repayment of some of the Federal funds used to cover insured losses. Under this conference report, for 2003, the insurance industry must repay the Federal assistance which is the difference between the sum of all insured losses paid by the industry and $10 billion. For 2004 and 2005, these repayments would be made for the difference between the sum of all insured losses and $12.5 billion and $15 billion, respectively. These repayments would be collected through a surcharge on the policies of all commercial insurance policyholders. Therefore, this conference report is not an insurance company bailout; it protects the American taxpayer against a big hit while continuing to maintain insurability against terrorist attacks. Furthermore, this conference report also provides taxpayer protection from punitive damages in lawsuits which claim terror-related losses or injuries. To illustrate this, this conference report requires all terror-related lawsuits to be considered in Federal court, rather than in state courts. Moreover, this conference report does not set a Federal standard for awarding punitive damages in terror-related lawsuits. However, it instead allows the state law in which the terrorist act occurred to prevail with respect to punitive damages. Most importantly, the conference report requires that punitive damages awarded through these lawsuits will not be paid for by Federal funds used to cover losses from terrorism. For my Nebraska constituents, it is important to note that punitive damages are not allowed under Nebraska state law in Nebraska state courts. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, this conference report balances the need of businesses to continue to receive commercial insurance against terrorist acts at affordable costs, with taxpayer liability protection. As a result, this Member urges his colleagues to support the conference report of H.R. 3210.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference report. Mr. Speaker, the conference report addresses a number of pressing intelligence needs. This Member will focus his remarks on only two. First, the legislation takes important steps to strengthen the intelligence community's analytical core. In recent years certain circumstances have demanded that we focus on terrorists, proliferators and drug traffickers. These are far more difficult targets to track then was the old Soviet Union. Frankly, the intelligence community took far too long to adapt to these new threats. It did not reach out aggressively to recruit human intelligence sources that could have provided us invaluable information. The community lost far too many skilled analysts whose job it is to provide early warning. This legislation provides much needed funding to build a dynamic, wide-ranging global analytical capability. A second important component of the intelligence authorization relates to terrorist finances. One of the major intelligence initiatives in the wake of 9/11 has been an attack on the financial assets of terrorist organizations and their supporters. Terrorist networks such as al Qaeda obviously cannot function without significant financing. And al Qaeda, for example, is supported by, one, a shadowy network of fund-raisers, money lenders, and shakedown artists; two, businesses and charities serving as front organizations; and, three, unscrupulous facilitators and middlemen. However, with the decision of the executive branch to fully exploit the existing authorities to target terrorist finances and with the granting of additional authorities under the U.S. PATRIOT Act, we are now aggressively attacking the money flow. To date over $100 million of suspected terrorist money has been seized or frozen by the United States and its allies and that is just the beginning. Mr. Speaker, this is an important and powerful tool in the war on terrorism. In order to maintain responsible legislative oversight over this effort, the Intelligence Authorization Act will require semi- annual reports on the number of assets seized, as well as the number of entities or individuals found to have engaged in financial support for terrorism. It will also require information on the total number of requests for asset seizures that have been granted, denied or modified. This important oversight will ensure the war against terrorism financing remains on track. In closing, this Member would congratulate the distinguished chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) for the leadership they have demonstrated in bringing forth a genuinely bipartisan product. I will say in her existing capacity we will certainly miss the gentlewoman's long and very important experience and contributions on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The conference report is a very serious effort. Each and every member of the committee dedicated long hours to the drafting of the legislation. Each member recognizes the importance of our action. This body can justifiably be proud of our efforts of the HPSCI, I believe, and particularly the leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi). Finally, and of crucial importance, the staff of the committee is truly excellent in their knowledge and commitment to our oversight and our authorization responsibilities. Mr. Speaker, this Member strongly urges adoption of the conference report of H.R. 4628.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this year, physicians and other skilled health care professionals absorbed a 5.4 percent cut in Medicare reimbursements. The cut went into effect in January, and the signs of access problems are already showing. Since rural physicians already receive less reimbursement for services provided to Medicare patients than urban physicians, this is a critical issue. Medicare patients in this Member's Congressional District are finding it increasingly difficult to find a physician. Some physicians will not accept patients who are 60 years old, because they are nearing Medicare-eligibility age. Lincoln, the second largest city in Nebraska, has a population of 225,581. We have 27 internists. According to estimates, only five to seven of these internists are accepting new Medicare patients. Where are new Medicare patients supposed to go to obtain the health care services they need when these internists cannot accept any more Medicare patients? Will these Medicare patients end up in hospital emergency rooms to obtain necessary health care services? Will they go untreated? The House passed corrective legislation already on June 28, 2002. The Senate has not acted. We cannot throw our hands up in the air, and give up. We cannot leave our senior citizens behind. We must protect our senior citizens and preserve access to physician services.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today to express his support for H.R. 5400, legislation which makes necessary changes to the charter agreement of the North American Development Bank (NADBank). The bill, which this Member introduced on September 18, 2002, is being considered under unanimous consent. This important legislation contains the legislative changes requested by the Administration. First, this Member would like to thank both the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey), the Majority Leader of the House, for initiating this unanimous consent request for H.R. 5400, and to the distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt) for supporting this request. Furthermore, this Member would also like to thank both the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), the Ranking Member of this Committee, for their support to this Member in my effort to bring this measure to the House Floor. As the Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade, this Member would also like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Ranking Member of this Subcommittee, for his support of H.R. 5400. This Member especially would also like to thank the following three original cosponsors of this legislation, who are all Members of the Financial Services Committee: Mr. Ose (R-CA), Mr. Gonzalez (D-TX), and Mr. Hinojosa (D-TX). All three of these Members provided valuable input into the initial drafting of H.R. 5400. Subsequently, the House Financial Services Committee passed H.R. 5400 by voice vote. With regard to H.R. 5400, this Member would like to discuss the following three items: Background on the NADBank; administration's request on the NADBank; and contents of H.R. 5400. Background on the NADBank During the 1993 debate of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), environmental issues emerged. A particular concern was that NAFTA could result in the industrialization and population growth in the U.S.-Mexico border region, which could further exacerbate pollution problems in this area. In addition, during the NAFTA debate, some Members of Congress were concerned that the perceived lax enforcement of environmental laws by Mexico could create a competitive advantage and give U.S. businesses incentives to relocate to Mexico. In fact, for some Members of Congress support for NAFTA was partially contingent on the identification of a structure to finance border environmental projects. As a result of these factors, which were raised in the NAFTA debate, the United States and Mexico agreed to the creation of a new institutional structure to promote the environmental health of the border region. As such, the Border Environment Cooperation Agreement established the NADBank and the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC). These institutions currently work together to assist communities within 100 kilometers (km) on either side of the U.S.- Mexico border by financing environmental infrastructure projects that address the need for wastewater treatment, drinking water, and disposal of municipal solid waste. Spanning 2100 miles from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean, the NADBank border region includes territory in the four U.S. states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Under the Border Environment Cooperation Agreement, the BECC is to certify the validity of environmental infrastructure projects. Alternatively, the NADBank determines the feasibility of BECC certified projects, and subsequently provides the appropriate financing. Since its inception, the BECC has certified 57 projects with a total construction cost of $1.2 billion. The NADBank has committed Environmental Protection Agency grant funds to 37 of these projects. However, as the Administration has testified, NADBank's overall performance has been inadequate and unsatisfactory. NADBank has approved only $23.5 million and disbursed only $11 million in loans to projects, despite having $450 million in authorized paid-in capital and a total lending capacity of $2.7 billion. Administration's Request on the NADBank Second, with regard to the Administration's request, in order to address the inadequacies of the NADBank, U.S. President George Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox formed a bi-national working group that held a series of discussions with states, communities, and other stakeholders in the border region with the purpose of generating plans for reform to strengthen the performance of the NADBank and the BECC. As a result of this working group, President Bush and President Fox came forth with a joint agreement, which was announced in Monterrey, Mexico, in March 2002. Two of the provisions in this joint agreement require U.S. congressional approval as they are amendments to the Border Environment Cooperation Agreement which established the NADBank. As a result, on July 19, 2002, the Administration made an official request for congressional action to make the following two changes: 1. The NADBank would be able to make grants and non-market rate loans out of its paid-in capital resources with the approval of its Board of Directors. (Currently, NADBank can only finance market rate loans.) 2. The region that the NADBank serves would be expanded on only the Mexican side from 100 km of the international boundary line to within 300 km of the international boundary line. With respect to the first requested legislative change, the Administration's rationale is that NADBank's current financial framework is having a limited impact in regions with high poverty rates. Communities in the border regions in many instances have been unable to afford market-rate financing for environmental infrastructure projects. The NADBank will have greater flexibility to address the environmental needs of the border region if they are also able to use non-market rate loans and grants. With regard to the second requested legislative change, the Administration's rationale is that the geographic expansion on the Mexican side of the international boundary will give the NADBank more opportunities to address a greater scope of environmental issues that affect communities along the United States and Mexican border. For example, with this change, the NADBank will be better able to undertake projects that improve water use over a broader geographic area, which would increase water supply in its shared rivers. It is important to note that, according to the Administration, this reform will be linked with a system that concentrates grants and low interest loans in the poorest communities within 100 km of the border. Contents of H.R. 5400 Third, as this Member mentioned earlier, on September 18, 2002, this Member introduced H.R. 5400 which makes necessary changes to the charter agreement of the NADBank. Before introducing H.R. 5400, this Member's Subcommittee conducted two hearings which, in part, addressed the subject of the NADBank. On May 2, 2002, the Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade conducted a hearing that included testimony from private sector panelists on the subject of the NADBank. At this hearing, the Subcommittee heard testimony from the Mayor of Eagle Pass, Texas, and the City Manager of Mercedes, Texas--communities along the U.S./Mexico international boundary. Testimony was also given by the former Chief Executive Officer of the NADBank and an investment banker who has worked with the NADBank. Furthermore, on July 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade conducted a hearing where Undersecretary of the Department of Treasury for International Affairs, Dr. John Taylor, provided testimony, which included his opinion as to the importance of the Administration's request on the NADBank. This legislation being considered under unanimous consent, includes the two previously discussed changes which the Administration requested. As such, H.R. 5400 would allow the NADBank to offer grant and non-market-rate financing and would expand the service area of the NADBank on the Mexican side to within 300 km of the U.S./Mexican international boundary line. Furthermore, H.R. 5400 would enhance congressional oversight through an annual reporting requirement on the subject of the NADBank by the Secretary of the Treasury to both the House Committee on Financial Services and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Currently, there is no such reporting requirement. This bill also includes different sense of the Congress resolutions. There is a sense of Congress, which was in the bill as introduced, that water conservation projects are eligible for funding from the NADBank and that the Board of the NADBank should support such qualified water conservation projects which assist Texas irrigators and agricultural producers in the lower Rio Grande River Valley. Furthermore, a sense of Congress was successfully offered by the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) during the full Committee markup. The provision expresses the sense of Congress that the Board of the NADBank should take into consideration the needs of all the border states before approving funding for water conservation projects, and strive to fund water conservation projects in each of the border states. A different sense of Congress was successfully offered by the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) during the full Committee markup. This provision states the sense of Congress that the Board of the NADBank should support the development of qualified water conservation projects in southern California and the other eligible areas in the four U.S. border states for the desalination of ocean saltwater and other enumerated uses listed in the bill. Lastly, a sense of Congress amendment was successfully offered by the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Ose) during the full Committee markup. As such, the resolution would express the sense of Congress that the Board of the NADBank should support the financing of projects which address coastal issues and the problem of pollution in both the U.S. and Mexico having an environmental impact along the shores of the Pacific Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, the resolution states that it is a sense of Congress that the NADBank should support the financing of projects which address air pollution. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, for the reasons stated and many others, it is very important that the House pass H.R. 5400 by unanimous consent. Furthermore, this Member is hopeful that the President can sign this legislation into law this year. Thank you.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of H.R. 3450, the Health Care Safety Net Improvement Act, this Member wishes to add his strong support for S. 1533, the Health Care Safety Net Amendments of 2001, as amended. Furthermore, this Member would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health; and the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, for bringing this important legislation to the House Floor today. This Member would also like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee; for their efforts to improve access to quality preventive and primary health care for the medically underserved--including the millions of Americans without health insurance coverage. This Member currently does not have a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in his Congressional District, but believes one is greatly needed. This Member is very pleased that the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department has taken the initiative to develop a Community Health Center planning committee. This Member would like to commend this committee for its dedication and commitment to improving health care in Nebraska. It is this member's understanding that the group intends to submit an application for the Community Health Center Federal Grant program in January 2003. This Member hopes this application will be given full and fair consideration. This Member is particularly pleased that language is included in S. 1533, as amended, that would provide automatic designation to Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC) and Federally Certified Rural Health Clinics as Health Professional Shortage Area (HPSA) facilities for a period of six years. This Member recognizes that the National Health Service Corps plays a critical role in providing care for underserved populations by placing clinicians in urban and rural areas. However, it has come to this Member's attention that health centers and rural clinics must obtain Health Professional Shortage Area designation to become eligible for the placement of National Health Service Corps personnel. While this member is pleased to see that S. 1533, as amended, would improve on the current HPSA designation process, he would have preferred that the bill include permanent automatic designation, which would have guaranteed that FQHCs and rural health clinics would not have to return to the current, cumbersome HPSA designation process. This is a process that certainly seems unnecessary and duplicative, and which in some cases may result in delays in the placement of needed practitioners at high-need health centers and rural health clinics. Last year, this Member sent a letter, along with several colleagues, to the Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health requesting this change on a permanent basis and greatly appreciates the inclusion of the provision--even in the short term. As amended, S. 1533, would: (1) reauthorize the critically important Community Health Centers program for another five years, including reaffirmation that Health Centers should be: located in high-need areas; provide comprehensive preventive and primary health care services; governed by community boards made up of a majority of current health center patients to assure responsiveness to local needs; and, open to everyone in the communities they serve, regardless of ability to pay; and (2) reauthorize the important Telehealth Programs, as well as the Rural Health Care Outreach Program and the Rural Health Network Development Program. In addition, S. 1533, as amended, would authorize a new Small Health Care Provider Quality Improvement Program. These programs will go a long way to facilitate the provision of care to vulnerable populations living in rural areas all across the county. In closing, Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to support S. 1533, as amended.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in strong support for the conference report on H.R. 5010, the Defense appropriations bill for FY2003. This Member would like to offer particular thanks to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Department of Defense Appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), and the Ranking Minority Member on the Subcommittee on Department of Defense Appropriations, the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) for their work on this important bill. Furthermore, this Member is very appreciative that the Committee has approved the appropriations of $3.5 million for a bioprocessing facility at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL). These funds will be used for the third phase of the project to establish and validate a current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) processing facility with the capability to make vaccines as therapeutic countermeasures against biological warfare agents. Tow cGMP pilot plants, one dedicated to yeast/bacterial culture and the other dedicated to mammalian cell culture will be built within the new Chemical Engineering building on the UNL campus. The funds will be used to build and equip the laboratories. This will be a commercial-grade facility, giving UNL the capability, if requested by the Department of Defense (DoD), to make vaccines against biological warfare agents and products that can be used as therapeutic countermeasures to treat people who have been exposed to biological agents. Currently, UNL is doing this on a smaller scale and, therefore, is well suited to pursue this expansion. This new facility certainly will enhance our nation's ability to respond to biological warfare. This Member sincerely thanks the Committee on Appropriations for including $1.375 million in fiscal year 2003 for the Air National Guard's Project ALERT. Currently, Project ALERT serves as an on-line training tool developed and used by the Nebraska National Guard in collaboration with the Department of Defense, the National Guard Bureau, the University of Nebraska, and Nebraska Educational Television. The $1.375 million appropriated in the conference report will assist with the development of the new courses and the modification of existing courses. Indeed, the implications of Project ALERT extend nationwide and to components of both the active and reserve military forces. Allowing military forces to complete some training courses on their own time, as Project ALERT does, provides an opportunity to cut on-site training costs and time and to maximize exercise time. For the U.S. military to meet the challenges it will face during the current war on terrorism and throughout the 21st Century, it is crucial that Congress invest in innovative and flexible training tools such as Project ALERT. In closing, Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to vote in support of the conference report for H.R. 5010.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to commend to his colleagues an editorial from the October 5, 2002, edition of the Omaha World Herald, entitled ``Plug the Flow of `Incentives' '' Gifts from drug companies do influence when and how much medicine is prescribed. This Member recognizes that physician-pharmaceutical interaction can produce some positive results, such as improved knowledge of treatment for complicated illnesses. However, interaction can also result in negative outcomes, such as increasing prescriptions for promoted drugs, while fewer generics are prescribed at no demonstrated advantage. As we consider adding a prescription drug benefit to the Medicare program and begin to examine ways to control prescription drug costs in the Medicaid program, it seems to me, that we need to ask the following questions: Are consumers obtaining good value for the resources expended on new pharmaceuticals? Are new prescription drugs on the market better, safer, and more effective than older drugs that have been on the market for quite some time? Does the Government have a role in determining more than simply the safety of new and established drugs? If so, does that role include evaluating clinical efficacy, convenience, and cost-effectiveness compared to current products? Plug the Flow of ``Incentives'' Pharmaceutical manufacturers have long realized that doctors are key to the health of their bottom lines. Now, using words like ``fraud,'' the federal government has indicated it will try to shut off the flood of goodies that drug makers pour over the decision-makers who are in a position to prescribed their products. Financial incentives to doctors, pharmacists or similar health care professionals given to induce them to prescribe or recommend particular drugs or to switch patients from one drug to another are common in the industry. But the practice could break federal fraud and abuse laws, according to officials at the Department of Health and Human Services. The department is planning to set standards that would ban such ``incentives'' for a wide range of medical, insurance and pharmacy workers who make drug decisions. The most notable underlying problem is the high cost of many of the brand-name drugs that are pushed hardest by the drug companies. These drugs, many of them with equally effective, cheaper alternatives, are profit centers for pharmaceutical companies. That means the companies are happy to shell out for weekend trips, expensive meals or other ``incentives'' for prescribing or switching patients to the designated medication. Doctors, pharmacy benefit managers and others who please the companies can be hired as do-little ``consultants'' to the manufacturers, sometimes for outrageously high pay. The new standards aren't, in themselves, laws. Companies that don't follow them, however, fact investigation under federal fraud and kickback statutes, a Health and Human Services official warned. A voluntary code of conduct adopted last spring by the industry apparently didn't go far enough. Prescription costs are rising steadily. No reasonable person would deny the industry a fair profit. But some of the practices revealed by Health and Human Services are shifty, deceptive and just plain unethical. We're glad to see the feds trying to put a stop to what amounts to bribery of medical decision-makers.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to commend to his colleagues an editorial from the October 3, 2002, edition of the Lincoln Journal-Star entitled, ``Don't Allow Saddam To Play Games.'' Saddam has provided no one in the international community with any reason to grant him concessions on the terms of a new U.N. weapons inspections regime, and yet the United Nations continues to acquiesce to Saddam's efforts to block a new weapons inspection regime from having unfettered access to possible weapons sites in Iraq. Indeed, the United Nation's actions only further erode the institution's credibility. When will the U.N. quit allowing itself to be duped by Saddam? Don't Allow Saddam To Play Games It's not surprising that Saddam Hussein tried to negotiate his way out of surprise inspections at his palaces. But it is surprising how quickly he got his way with United Nations officials. And it's even more surprising that U.N. officials would pat themselves on the back for an agreement that granted Saddam such an important concession. The United States and the rest of the world cannot afford to allow Saddam to play those sorts of games--again. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell summed it up well. ``We will not be satisfied with Iraqi half-truths or Iraqi compromises, or Iraqi efforts to get us back into the same swamp they took the United Nations into.'' Access to Saddam eight palaces is crucial because they are large sprawling complexes that cover a combined total of 12 square miles. The sites contain sumptuous living quarters with vistas of man-made lakes and waterfalls. Authorities also suspect they contain bunkers, quite possibly military control centers and perhaps laboratories for experimenting or manufacturing nuclear devices and other weapons of mass destruction. Before weapons inspectors were pulled out of Iraq, they were permitted to visit the palaces only with advance warning and in the presence of a diplomat. These rules often were stretched so that Iraqis had days to move, conceal or destroy evidence. In the last two years during which inspectors were active in Iraq, inspectors were barred entry to more than 60 sites. More than 40 of those sites were Saddam's presidential compounds. Despite the constant delays and harassment, inspectors were successful in finding evidence of four nuclear weapons projects and manufacture of high toxic nerve gas VX. Their success should have given the United Nations ample reasons to take a strict line with Saddam. Ultimately his foot-dragging and posturing paid off. He was able to peel away support on the U.N. Security Council for a tough response on inspections. The temporary suspension of weapons inspections stretched into years. It it had not been for the challenge President George W. Bush presented the United Nations earlier this month to force Saddam to live up to its own resolutions, resumption of weapons inspections still would be a forgotten issue. It's discouraging that United Nations officials seem to have so quickly forgotten their previous misstep with the crafty dictator. The Bush administration is amply justified in taking a hard line against concessions that would permit Saddam to renew his old tactics. The United Nations has been there and done that. This time is member nations need to insist on inspections that truly are unfettered.

Mr. BEREUTER

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure now to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), a valued member of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Kerns), a valued member of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. KERNS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn). (Ms. DUNN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence). (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BEREUTER. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller).