Kevin Brady

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Concurrent Resolution 42, the concurrent resolution just agreed to.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 16 and 17, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 16, and ``yes'' on No. 17, final passage.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, Americans are not taxed too much? Look at how we spend our day. We get up in the morning, get our first cup of coffee on which we pay a sales tax. Jump in the shower and we pay a water tax. Get in our car to drive to work and pay a fuel tax. At work we pay an income tax and a payroll tax. Drive home to the house on which we pay a property tax. Flip on the lights and pay an electricity tax. Turn on the TV, pay a cable tax. Pick up the telephone, pay a telephone tax. Kiss our spouse good night and pay a marriage penalty tax. And on and on and on until, at the end of our lives, we pay a death tax. Well, no wonder families and the elderly in this country have such a tough time making ends meet. They need relief, and the Republican plan provides it.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Madam Speaker, let American workers have no doubt who is on their side. Across-the-board tax relief means all taxpayers will get to keep a little more of what they earn, not what Washington earns, what they earn. Unlike the approach offered by the other side whereby only some people get a tax cut while others do not, the Republican approach means that if one pays taxes, if one is giving up one's hard-earned paycheck, one is going to get a little more tax relief. Our education reforms will cut the Federal bureaucracy and send more money directly down to teachers. Our Social Security reforms will protect seniors who are in the program, the near elderly, the baby boomers like myself, and especially those young people coming into a system they do not believe is ever going to be there when they need it at retirement. Our proposal to build a long-term 21st century defense system will address new threats to our Nation. That is how Republicans propose to secure America's future.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose amending House rule to increase the amount of gifts a member of Congress or their employees may receive, and am disappointed a recorded vote was not requested so that members would be held accountable to taxpayers for their vote. There is a reason the institution of Congress is held in such low esteem by the American public: people simply don't believe we do the right things for the right reason, and that we are here to look out for our own interests rather than those of our constituents. My experience is that that is not the case. But clearly we have a credibility problem and a trust problem. Increasing the gifts we can receive only reinforces that lack of trust and makes it harder for us to lead. Congress needs to lead by example. We didn't today.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, some Americans are not watching these proceedings. Instead in hushed courtrooms across this country families slashed apart by violent crime and innocent people wrongly accused are staring intently at a witness stand, and they are praying. For many their best hope, perhaps their only hope, for justice depends upon that witness telling the truth, the full truth, under oath. Truth does matter, and if it is no longer the duty of the President to tell the truth under sworn oath, can we require it of any American? The answer is no which is why justice, hope and the Constitution demand that today we vote ``yes.'' After carefully studying all the facts, there is strong and sufficient evidence to warrant a trial in the United States Senate. I intend to vote ``yes'' on each of the four articles of impeachment of the President that were forwarded by the House Judiciary Committee. In making this decision, I upheld my constitutional responsibility to act as a fair and thoughtful juror. I weighed the evidence against the charges and cast my vote without regard to polls, party or conjecture about any future presidential race. I am sad for the Nation because none of this needed to occur. It is only the second time in our Nation's history that a vote to impeach the President of the United States has taken place on the floor of the House of Representatives. Unfortunately, this pain could have been prevented had the President simply conducted himself decently and within the law as do most Americans. It is the duty of the President to tell the whole truth under sworn oath, as it is for every American. This truth is no less than the foundation of our justice system, as important as the constitutional rights of the accused. If the President is held to be above the law, the ultimate and predictable consequence is that achieving justice in America's legal system will become significantly more difficult. The necessity for the truth is reflected by the appropriately severe punishment for those who willfully refuse to provide it--which is up to five years imprisonment for each Federal violation. Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law than those who make and discharge them. To its credit, America continues to strive to preserve equality under the law as a self-evident truth. It is essential to the common consent of citizens who must abide by these laws. I am proud to represent the impressive new George Bush Presidential Library and Museum which is located on the Texas A&M University campus in College Station, Texas. Engraved on the southern exterior wall of the library, engraved high enough to catch the late afternoon Brazos Valley sun each day, is an appropriate quote from our former President whom I deeply admire and respect. It is from his 1991 inaugural presidential address, and I take inspiration from it as I deliberated on this matter: ``Let future generations understand the burdens and blessings of freedom. Let them say we stood where duty required us to stand.'' Duty requires us to stand here today. The burdens of freedom demand we uphold the Constitution regardless how tiring, how distasteful, how difficult.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, soon a remarkable man of faith will bid farewell after 13 years as CEO and executive director of INTERFAITH of The Woodlands, Texas. Our nation should take proud note of the inspiring life and the immeasurable contributions of the Rev. W.D. Broadway. A graduate of Schreiner Institute in Kerrville, Texas, Reverend Broadway earned a bachelor of arts degree from the University of Corpus Christi followed by bachelor and master of Divinity degrees from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. After school Reverend Broadway was guided to the Texas communities of Rockport, Lancaster, Portland and The Woodlands, where in each he served as pastor of the Southern Baptist Church. With him were his most treasured blessings--wife Hugh Delle Manahan, daughter Jerene and son Mike. It was through his extraordinary leadership of INTERFAITH of The Woodlands that I proudly became one of his many friends and admirers. Although no one word can hope to illustrate this bountiful life to date, on reflection Reverend W.D. Broadway is, above all, a builder: A builder of spirit. In men and women, young and old alike, through the World of the Lord. As powerful and compelling in person as in the pulpit, Reverend Broadway frequently provided a crucial moral compass by smiling and announcing ``I feel a sermon coming on * * *.'' A builder of houses of worship. Under Reverend Broadway's stewardship fourteen building programs were launched in the churches he ministered. His hands and heart have been directed to serve as the fund raising consultant for another 67 churches--Methodist, Baptist, Nazarene and Presbyterian. Think a moment about that: What a remarkable seed Rev. Broadway has sown throughout this land, to so exalt the Lord by helping others attain their vision of constructing much-needed houses of faith. He is a builder of hope. This I know first hand. During the terrible Texas economic recession during the late 1980's, many families found themselves without jobs, without a means to feed their children or to meet their mortgage payments. In some disheartening instances, both parents suddenly found themselves without work, shattering years of hard earned hopes and dreams. Reverend Broadway and I worked together back then to create the Interfaith Training & Employment Project to help laid off workers find new jobs--to help them develop new skills and survive the emotional toll of financial uncertainty. Thankfully, the Private Industry Council of the Houston-Galveston Area Council supported the effort. Since 1987, under this astute and caring leadership, ITEP has helped 24,112 people find new jobs and new hope. It has become one of the most successful job training partnerships in Texas. And it is due to the strength and vision of W.D. Broadway. He is a builder of the community. When Reverend Broadway was named 1995 Citizen-of-the-Year for South Montgomery County, chamber of commerce Chairman Mike Karlins noted ``of the churches, community groups and residents listed in INTERFAITH's annual directory, few have not benefitted from his encouragement, compassion and service to our community. He and his army of volunteers have welcomed thousands to our community, watching over our children as we work, helping families get through tough situations, providing assistance in finding jobs and enriching the lives of our senior citizens.'' Mr. Karlins also observed that Rev. Broadway ``is happiest and at his best when facing the challenges of planting and nurturing the seeds of our religious infrastructure.'' In times of crisis, ``his ability to marshall community resources was never more apparent than in the days following the devastating flood of the past year.'' ``Above all, he loves this community and those in it. As a result, we are all better for it.'' Soon Rev. Broadway will walk out the door of his INTERFAITH office for the last time to begin a well-earned retirement. To his friends and co-workers it seems unthinkable: a day at INTERFAITH without the kind eyes and broad smile that distinguish the ruddy countenance of ``W.D.'' His wife of 47 years, Hugh Delle, remembers a long time neighbor in The Woodlands who once commented, ``W.D., you have INTERFAITH in your head.'' Rev. Broadway quickly replied, ``I like to think I have it in my heart.'' Humble and at heart a servant of the Lord, W.D. will surely be embarrassed by this tribute--even more so if all of his amazing accomplishments, service to the community and national professional leadership positions were identified. In total or in part, his contributions are testament to a life dedicated to living the Gospel and forging the good works of the Lord here on earth. Reverend W.D. Broadway is truly a builder--of love, inspiration, grace and compassion. As a community and as a nation, we are better for it.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a very unique, special person--Kay Schulze of Bryan-College Station, Texas. It's been said that a person has not lived a perfect day unless you have done something for someone who will never be able to repay you. By that measure, Kay has enjoyed many a perfect day. Originally a native of Ohio, where much of her family still resides, Kay worked hard to put her young husband through school. In a home rich with love and faith, Kay raised four children of whom she is unabashedly proud. She didn't just teach, but practiced daily her strong belief that human dignity, economic freedom and individual responsibility are the characteristics that distinguish our nation. As her children entered their teenage years, Kay saw an opportunity to increase her citizen duty-to-country and began volunteering in local Ohio elections for public office. It was an obligation she learned early in life through her uncle who served with distinction in the State Legislature of Ohio. In 1980 she proudly attended her first GOP national convention. Four years later Texas received the gift of her enthusiasm and work ethic when her family moved to College Station, Texas. Kay wasted little time in continuing her civic duty and sharing her wonderful leadership skills, serving as president of the Republican Women of Brazos County no less than three terms. Time and time again she happily shouldered the time-consuming task of coordinating local get-out-the- vote phone banks and encouraged young and old alike to become more involved in shaping the direction of our democracy. Inevitably, by unanimous acclamation, in 1990 Kay was honored as the Brazos County Volunteer-of-the-Year by the Republican Party of Brazos County. Somehow, through it all, she always makes time to be a good friend, wife, mother and confidant to those in need of common-sense advice. Many citizens who serve in public office in Brazos County, the Texas Legislature and in the halls of the United States Congress owe a great debt to the tireless efforts of Kay Schulze. I am delighted to admit that I would not now be serving my first term in the U.S. House of Representatives representing the Eighth Congressional District of Texas had Kay Schulze not believed in me. For the past two years she had also served on my Texas A & M University Agricultural Intern Selection Committee, interviewing and recommending bright young students who she believes can contribute to serving the constituents of our district. Kay Schulze is a phenomenal person with a wonderful intellect, an unshakable faith and a very, very good heart. I am proud and blessed to call her my friend. Recently, I am sad to report, Kay rejoined her family in Ohio as she continues her courageous battle against cancer. But there is no spot on this Earth distant enough to reach beyond the love, thoughts and prayers of her dedicated friends in Texas. America is a better place today because of Kay Schulze.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. BRADY of Texas. As the chairman of the subcommittee may know, the National Academy of Public Administration recently issued a study on the Commercial Space Center program which states that the role NASA headquarters should play in the Commercial Space Center program includes ``guidance, oversight, funding, and the clarification of expectations and specification of accountability.''

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank the chairman for his leadership as chair of the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics and that of the ranking minority member for the leadership on this important issue. Mr. Speaker, when this bill was marked up in the subcommittee, we added a section which required that NASA administer the Commercial Space Center program from NASA headquarters. These centers are the primary mechanism by which NASA works to spark new commercial research and investment in space development, particularly regarding commercial research on and use of the International Space Station. Because these centers are so important, the committee wanted to make sure that they were administered and funded in a fair and consistent way by NASA headquarters.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, due to illness I was unavoidably detained and missed roll call votes 457, 458, 459, and 460. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes'' on roll call vote 457, H.R. 4112, the Legislative Branch Appropriations conference report for fiscal year 1999. On roll call vote 458, I would have voted ``yes'' on H.R. 3616, the Department of Defense Authorization conference report for fiscal year 1999. On roll call 459, I would have voted ``no'' on the Watt Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3736, the Workforce Improvement and Protection Act. On final passage of H.R. 3736, roll call vote 460, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I fully support this bill and this rule. I come from a State that has benefited from fast track and from international trade. One out of every three new jobs created in Texas are as a result of international trade because of NAFTA, even with its imperfections. We have tens of thousands of new jobs that Texas families now enjoy because we are willing to compete. I did not move to Washington. I live in Texas and just commute each week. On my drive to the airport and back to my district, I see and go by dairies and farms and small businesses and large companies where there are Texas workers, American families who are enjoying the American dream, putting their kids in school, saving for college, purchasing a home because they believe in the American principle of free, fair, competition. Ninety-six percent of all the world's consumers live outside of America. They all cannot buy as much as we do today because they are growing fast. Other countries are competing for them. I want our American companies out there competing today for that market and those sales, because it is not our jobs that we are looking at, it is our children's jobs and our children's children's jobs that depend upon our competing today internationally. I golf twice a year, whether I need to or not. My friends who golf more often and like to wage a friendly bet tell me that the outcome of those friendly bets are often determined on the first tee, when the rules are drawn up and the strokes are given. In international trade today, America is not on that first economic tee. The strokes are not coming to American companies. The rules do not favor fair treatment for our companies. We are losing jobs because of it. Let us not practice partisan politics. Let us not pit the President against the Republicans. I think jobs for our workers, for our farmers, for our small businesses ought to take precedence over partisan politics, which is being encouraged today.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 446, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Committee on International Relations for yielding me this time. Today I rise in strong support of House Resolution 381, and I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this resolution introduced by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller). Mr. Speaker, this resolution is not a debate about the use of the death penalty. Officially United States policy supports the use of the death penalty, and therefore, our agreements ought to reflect it. This does not mean supporters of the death penalty, which I am one of, relish it, but believe that, in fact, in our country, in our criminal justice system, it is in some parts the only measure of justice many victims of violent crime will ever receive. Our extradition agreements ought to reflect that measure of justice. We have a constitutional responsibility to renegotiate our extradition treaties for our constituents who have to deal with the tragic loss of a friend or family member. As Mr. Bellush writes, and as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) talked about earlier today, Mexico unfortunately is setting itself up as a safe harbor for murders and capital criminals that commit crimes in the United States. Mr. Del Toro is an American citizen who killed another American citizen on American soil. Mexico has no business holding on to him any longer. Mr. Speaker, this is not an isolated case. We find this an obstacle in our efforts to stop violence, money laundering, and drug trafficking across our borders, and the extradition treaty becomes an obstacle to justice in those areas as well. I am proud as a representative from Texas to share a common border with Mexico, and we share many commonalities, but we ought to respect each other's criminal justice system enough to allow the laws and the justice of each country to prevail.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 421 is a bipartisan effort introduced with the strong support and leadership of the chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ben Gilman), and the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, the gentleman from California (Mr. Elton Gallegly). It expresss the sense of the House of Representatives deploring the tragic and senseless murder of Bishop Juan Gerardi, to call on the government of Guatemala to expeditiously bring those responsible for the crime to justice, and to call on the people of Guatemala to reaffirm their commitment to continue to implement the peace accords without interruption to bring attention. In some ways it is appropriate that we are considering this resolution today. It was on this day in 1776 that our Second Continental Congress authorized the use of the name ``the United States'' for our young Nation. Historians tell us no other subject more appropriately demonstrates one of the important steps taken by our Founding Fathers in our Nation's move towards independence and freedom. Just as we have achieved that goal, Bishop Gerardi's report, which was a monumental, historic report entitled ``Guatemala: Never Again,'' was and is an important step in Guatemalans' efforts at achieving their peace and their freedom. As we may recall, late in the evening on Sunday, April 26 of this year, Bishop Gerardi was brutally bludgeoned to death in his garage as he returned from his usual Sunday night dinner with his sister and her family. Specifically, the skull of Bishop Gerardi was crushed by a wedge of concrete. The autopsy revealed that the Bishop had been bashed in the head repeatedly, and in the face, at least 17 times. Mr. Speaker, the Bishop's face was bashed so badly that another priest living in the church's compound could only recognize his body by a ring on one of the fingers. This attack occurred just 2 days after Bishop Gerardi, one of Guatemala's, and indeed, our world's, foremost human rights activists, released a report providing the most extensive account of human rights atrocities committed during the 36-year civil war that plagued the country until the peace accords were signed in December of 1996. One aspect of that agreement called for the conflict to be investigated to determine the truth for historical purposes. This effort was led by the Bishop. This report indicated that while both the Guatemalan military and the guerillas committed war crimes, the military was responsible for most of the deaths, almost 80 percent of the 150,000 unarmed civilians killed during the civil war, and for the disappearance of at least 50,000 more. Additionally, the document also detailed how at least 1.5 million people were victimized, to varying degrees. Almost immediately after word of this attack became public, Guatemalan President Arzu formed a commission to investigate the Bishop's death. At the same time, our FBI sent several people to Guatemala to assist the government with their investigation. Since those agents' return, the FBI has sent other agents to the country to assist in the investigation as needed. Because the investigation is still ongoing, we would do more harm than good by commenting on any of the various paths the investigation has taken so far. Rather, what we must do is to continue to provide the Guatemalan government and the people the necessary support to help solve this murder, to bring to justice those responsible for committing it, and to continue implementation of the peace accords. The question in this resolution for human rights activists throughout the world that must be answered is not who murdered Bishop Gerardi, but rather, who ordered Bishop Gerardi murdered. In one of his last public speeches, he closed with a biblical quote brought to mind by the memory of the painful facts of his report. He said, ``And the Lord said to Cain, where is Abel, thy brother? And he said, I know not. Am I my brother's keeper? And he said, what hast thou done? The voice of thy brother's blood cryeth unto me from the ground.'' Mr. Speaker, the voice of Bishop Gerardi's blood cries to the people of Guatemala and to the world from the ground to determine and to call for justice to be brought. We must not and should not let this murder destroy the peace so many people have worked so hard to bring about.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson) and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen) for the leadership they have had on this issue. I think we do have to agree that we need to enforce the laws on campaign finance in America, whether they are existing laws or the new laws we are talking about, because without enforcement they are meaningless, what we are talking about is meaningless. Let me tell my colleagues this. I am proud to be in support of the freshman bill because my concern is that every election year we seem to drift farther and farther away from a citizen Congress, one made up of people from all walks of life. Today an open seat in Congress costs about a million dollars to win. A lot of people do not have a million dollars, they do not know where they would get a million dollars. And that is means that some day, and it is doubling every four years, by the way, so some day we are going to wake up and find out only the very wealthy people can serve in Congress. And I know a lot of people who may not be rich, but they are wealthy in common sense, they are prosperous in their principles, they have tremendous values, and while they may not live in the biggest house on the hill in my town, they would do America proud serving this House on this Hill, and I think the freshman bill moves us back toward a citizen Congress. Now let me tell my colleagues what the freshman bill is not. It is not a gutting bill on campaign finance reform. We have heard that mindless empty mantra so long that when applied to this bill it simply does not fit, because I have watched how hard our freshmen from both sides of the aisle have thoughtfully worked to push and move this bill forward, that it simply is silly, and we deserve better. And those leaders, freshmen leaders, deserve better. And finally, Mr. Chairman, I was disappointed to see today that our colleagues were urged to vote ``no'' or ``present'' on the freshman substitute. Let me just urge everyone to take a stand on this bill. There is a reason the present light is yellow. It is reserved for those timid and meek souls who refuse to take a stand on the issue and whose legacy in the debate on campaign finance is: Want to be recorded as being in the room. Vote ``yes'' or vote ``no'', but take a stand on the principles against or for banning soft money, preserving free speech, preserving States' rights, encouraging people to raise money in their district, and let us move forward, yes or no, but record and take a stand and, I hope, in support of the freshman bill.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Nebraska for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support House Resolution 469 and would like to thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall) for introducing this important resolution expressing the sense of Congress concerning what is known as a cooperative fire suppression agreement with Mexico. This resolution seeks to give congressional support for the negotiation of an agreement with Mexico, addressing fire suppression along the border region of the United States and Mexico. As you may know and have heard, smoke from the recent fires in Mexico and Central America drifted into the southern United States from the Gulf of Mexico, causing respiratory health problems for people all over the United States. These fires brought to light a missing piece in our international firefighting programs: The lack of a cooperative agreement with Mexico. The United States has had a cooperative fire suppression agreement with Canada since 1982. This agreement allows our U.S. Forest Service firefighters to enter Canada to aid in fire suppression when fires occur along the 200-kilometer band on the border, and vice versa. This agreement permits both countries to help contain border fires that threaten their territory and permits either country to seek reimbursement for these services. The agreement has been successfully implemented to address fires that occur along the borders with U.S. and Canadian firefighters working jointly to protect both countries from wildfires. Unfortunately, we do not have such an agreement with Mexico. In the past, small, easily manageable fires have grown into large, destructive wildfires that spread into the United States. This type of agreement is imperative for the protection of both U.S. citizens and their property. At the recent Binational Commission between the United States and Mexico, our State Department, with the backing of over 40 Members of the House of Representatives, and with the backing of 6 Senators from our border States, presented the Mexican delegation with a draft text of the agreement. It is extremely important that the State Department continue to pursue these negotiations if we are to prevent future catastrophes from occurring along the border. Currently, the potential for fire on the border region is tremendously high. The wet winter in the Southwest gave growth to large amounts of grass and underbrush. The ensuing drought and massive heat wave have turned these grasses into the perfect tinder for fires on both sides of the border. The danger is real and as we have seen from the fires in southern Mexico, you do not have to live next to the fire to be affected by it. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 331, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate the efforts of the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Portman, and his desire to protect tropical rainforests worldwide, I wish to again go on record in strong opposition to H.R. 2870, the Tropical Forest Conservation Act. As you know, I voiced my opposition to this when it passed the House International Relations Committee by voice vote, and voted ``no'' again when the House approved it by a vote of 356-61 on March 19, 1998. Mr. Speaker, my concerns are simple. Foremost is the cost of this legislation. Specifically, the bill wastes more than $300 million in existing resources over three years to facilitate ``debt-for-nature'' swaps with foreign countries. This measure in effect forgives U.S. debts which are unlikely to be repaid fully by less developed countries. In exchange, these countries promise to protect their tropical forests. Common sense tells us a country that claims to lack the financial resources to repay its debts is unlikely to have the financial resources to restore and preserve their rain forests. More importantly, why should America pay another sovereign nation to do what is clearly their responsibility and in their own best interest? This ``pay me or I'll shoot myself'' scheme makes little sense. As a businessman who survived the Texas recession in the 1980's and watched our local banks address the difficulty of non-performing loans, my other concern is a basic one: Is this the best and highest return for American loans financed by the hard-earned tax dollars of working families who struggle to make ends meet each month? The answer is no. Loans made in good faith by United States taxpayers should be repaid in full, or in unique situations worked out for the highest and best return for the dollar. H.R. 2870, while well intentioned, is ``feel good'' legislation that leaves American taxpayers holding an empty bag and, I predict, will do little to preserve the world's rain forests.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, June 25, 1998 by unanimous consent I was granted a leave of absence for official business at the request of House Majority Leader Dick Armey. As a member of the House International Relations Committee, I proudly co- hosted the European Parliament for the 49th United States/European Parliament Interparliamentary Meeting in College Station, Texas, of which I represent. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on roll call vote 267, ``nay'' on roll call vote 268, ``aye'' on roll call vote 269, ``aye'' on roll call vote 270, ``nay'' on roll call vote 271, ``aye'' on roll call vote 272, ``nay'' on roll call 273 and ``aye'' on roll call vote 274.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a cosponsor of the freshman bipartisan bill, which is the underlying bill for this debate. I think it is a fair and a balanced approach, and I am eager to debate it. I think people are starving for debate on this issue for the right reasons, not to divert attention from scandals, not for election year politics, not to give either party an advantage. I am excited about this debate, and I appreciate the leadership bringing this issue to the floor. I do not share the concern about 258 amendments. I just finished serving in the Texas Legislature. When we would rewrite important parts of our law such as rewriting public education code, we would routinely have 400 amendments, because we had 400 good ideas and different ideas about what education needs to be. We worked through those amendments. We worked through the days. We worked through the nights. We finished with a good product. I have found our colleagues have a lot of good ideas on how to reform campaign finance in America, and I want to hear them. I know that some of them, I disagree with. Some give parties an advantage rather than campaign finance reform. But rather than have either party select those amendments in the back rooms, I think they ought to be out front for America to debate, to hear, and to judge, and for the will of the House to prevail with the deadline in place for commitment to finish this bill and finish this debate. I support this rule and welcome open, honest debate.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Madam Chairman, new campaign laws will not help if we do not first enforce the ones we have, and Congress must enforce and must ensure the free expression of speech, and that is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the freshman reform bill. Each year, we seem to drift farther and farther away from the original intent of Congress as a citizen legislature, electing people from all walks of life and stations of life. A citizen Congress is disappearing in great part due to horribly expensive campaigns whose costs are out of control and getting worse. Today, it takes about $1 million. The average cost of winning a competitive seat in Congress is $1 million. That means a lot of good people in our community will never raise their hands to run for Congress because they do not have $1 million and they do not know how they would find it, and those costs are doubling every 4 years. For a Nation founded on representative government, that is alarming. Madam Chairman, I love being part of a Republican Congress that is known for challenging business as usual in Washington. Now is the time and we are the ones who take on the difficult past of bringing some common sense to these campaigns. It will not be easy. Nothing important ever is. But it will be worth it to make sure that, someday, our children do not wake up in the future to find that our Congress is reserved for only the wealthy few. When it comes to doing the right thing in America, money is not everything. Integrity is more important than a fat wallet. Character still counts. If we believe in the citizen Congress, we know that we have to make sure the doors are open to families and working Americans who are only rich in principle and wealthy in common sense. The freshman bill is common sense. It is constitutional, it preserves free speech, it protects States' rights, and it avoids the extremes without giving advantage to either party. As a Republican, I confess that the bills that give my party an advantage are awfully tempting. As a Republican and an American, I know that the principle of a citizen Congress is a higher principle. That is what America's founders envisioned, that is what generations of Americans have given their lives for, that is our challenge to preserve.

Mr. BRADY of Texas

Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rarely submit remarks to be entered into the Congressional Record, but I commend to the nation the following editorial published April 29, 1998 in the Kingwood, Texas Observer. The writer is Cynthia Calvert, who is managing editor of the newspaper, a community leader, a dedicated mother of two and, I am proud to say, a friend. Given the current tone of debate over capital punishment--in which too often the killer is glorified while the victim and their loved ones are forgotten--this editorial is a poignant reminder of the true, lasting loss when violent crime touches our lives. [From the Kingwood Observer, Apr. 29, 1998] One Mother's Good-bye (By Cynthia Calvert) Last Friday evening, the state of Texas executed another murderer. Lesley Lee Gosch, 42, was put to death at 6:38 p.m. At that exact moment, I was watching, with my two children the pink, yellow, golden sunset on the Intercoastal Canal near my family's beach home on the Bolivar Peninsula. Lesley Lee Gosch had twice asked for clemency, that is being spared, set free--for his crimes. He had two, at least. He committed the murder of a young San Antonio housewife while trying to gather money to avoid a trial for making and selling illegal gun silencers. Most of us in Kingwood don't need too many gun silencers. Perhaps only really really bad people need to muffle the noise of a gunshot. Gosch was an Eagle Scout. Yes, all those meetings and badges and camping trips and oaths--well, they just dissolved into an evil nothingness. Gosch was name in Thursday's and Friday's headlines, albeit second pagers, for a day or two. Now he is dead, along with Karla Faye Tucker and three others so far this year (37 in 1997). Gosch is notable to me because I knew his victim--Rebecca Jo Patton. Becky was only 42 (ironically the age of Gosch when executed and nearly my age as I write this) when Gosch shot her six times in the head and left her in the hallway of her San Antonio home for her daughters to find. Those girls were 15 and 11. I am 41 and my children are 13 and 9. Just stop for a moment and imagine the desolation and grief you would feel if someone was senselessly taken from you like Becky was from her family. Gosch and a friend delivered flowers as a ruse to Becky and then, at gunpoint, forced her to call her bank-president husband and demand a huge ransom. The pair were then going to use the cash to fly to Belize, spending the rest of their days in the sun-drenched Caribbean. A nice life if you can get it. Instead, Gosch got 13 years in Huntsville, two media- frenzied pleas for mercy and then death. His buddy got 45 years and is schedule to be released in June. My friend got murdered. Her husband, for a while, got suspicious looks and doubts. Her daughters got pain and tears, and graduations and boyfriends, and weddings with no mother. Texans got the bill. But our victims you see, get very little by law. In Texas, victims do not have the right to attend the trial of the accused. You cannot go, without the judge's permission, to the trial of the person who murders your mother. I was a young mom who joined First Presbyterian Church of San Antonio in 1984. I signed up for everything that had childcare. I joined, one Sunday September morning, the ``Uncomfortables'' class. The class for those who have deep, unanswered questions about Christianity and religion but who still believe. To my great surprise, she was there. Becky Patton--the very life of the 2,000-member downtown church. The one who was in every circle, on every youth list, who taught the little kids at Bible School, who performed countless, anonymous unselfish acts, who sustained the church. She was uncomfortable? She had question, even doubts? I was thoughtful and then glad. If God let Becky have questions, then questions weren't so bad. Then I wasn't so bad. We both went to Thursday morning Bible study, led by Senior Minister Louis Zbinden. I studied, and hard, especially considering I had an 11-month-old to mother. I researched those three typed pages of questions each week. I studied. I learned. One Wednesday, two desperate men bought flowers and rang Becky's doorbell. They connived their way in. They put a gun to her head and made her call her husband for money. Something went wrong--many later speculated she saw Gosch's deformed little finger and could identify him. She begged for her life. They shot her six times, in the head. The time between her call for money and the police bursting in her front door was less than an hour. An angel was taken that day. The next day was Thursday, the weekly Bible study. Devastation and grief swallowed the sanctuary where several hundred women sat in stunned numbness. The normally unflappable Louis could not choke back his tears. Gosch went on to live for nearly 13 more years. Becky's daughter's grew up--I had a second child. He asked for and received stays of his execution. His last request was based on the Texas Open Meetings Act. Incredibly callous and disrespectful and contemptuous. Just like his behavior 13 years earlier in that San Antonio home. Prison just doesn't change them. The true crime is the delay in this punishment and we are the ones responsible for it. We sit at home and do not call or even write our legislators to demand swift punishments. It is those intervals between the crime and the punishment that is wrong. Time to think, time to beg, time to live. Years and years of hard, hard moments for the families. The mother of any child will tell you that punishment must quickly follow misbehavior or the lesson is lost. Criminals today have no quick consequences. Gosch had 13 years! The only ones to really serve life sentences are the families. Louis would often say that the most common words in heaven must surely be ``Oh''. Because that is what is said when finally we have perfect understanding. ``Oh!,'' we'll say. Good-bye Becky. While I'm still uncomfortable, I know you aren't.